EKONOMİK RASYONELLİĞİN ELEŞTİRİSİ: HERBERT SİMON’UN SINIRLI RASYONELLİK ANALİZİ

Yıl 2024, , 203 - 221, 31.12.2024

Musa Demirhan , Taher Mirabi

https://doi.org/10.46849/guiibd.1361355

Öz

Rasyonalite, sadece ekonomik açıdan değil, aynı zamanda felsefi, sosyal ve psikolojik boyutlara da sahip bir kavram olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Bu nedenle rasyonellik konusunda çok çeşitli görüşlerle karşılaşılmaktadır. Bu görüşlerden biri de rasyonelliği kişisel çıkara dayalı değişmez bir varsayım olarak gösteren geleneksel iktisat yaklaşımıdır. Tam rasyonellik yaklaşımına birçok eleştiri yapılmıştır. Bu eleştirilerden biri de Herbert Simon'un önerdiği tam rasyonelliğe karşı sınırlı rasyonelliktir. Klasik iktisadın, faydanın temelde hedefe ulaşmada özetlendiği tam rasyonellik yaklaşımını eleştiren Simon, karar sürecini, tamamen bilgiye sahip bir kişinin tasarrufunda olan bir süreç değil, dışsal ve içsel çeşitli faktörlerin etkisi altında olan bir süreç olarak değerlendirmektedir. Sonuçta insanın verdiği karar tamamen optimal bir karar değil, aksine onu araştırmayı ve değerlendirmeyi bırakacak belli bir tatmin düzeyine getiren bir karar olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Tam rasyonellik yaklaşımının aksine, bireyin yapılan seçimden duyduğu tatmin, kişisel menfaatin tam olarak gerçekleşmesinden kaynaklanan tek fayda değildir; aynı zamanda karar vericinin inancını, sosyal ve bireysel tatminini de takip etmektedir. Simon'un araştırma yöntemi basit ve açık olmasına rağmen, görünen o ki bu teorinin sonucu, yönteminden daha çok önem arz etmektedir. İktisat teorisinin temel taşı olarak kabul edilen tam rasyonellik gerçeklikle örtüşemiyorsa, geleneksel iktisat teorisinin toplumu anlama ve toplumun sorunlarına çözüm üretecek pratik öneriler sunma yeteneğine sahip olmadığı sonucuna ulaşılabilinmektedir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, rasyonalite kavramının sadece ekonomik boyutta değil, aynı zamanda felsefi, sosyal ve psikolojik açılardan da incelenerek, bu çeşitli bakış açılarıyla karşılaşılmasının araştırılmasının yanı sıra insan davranışlarının alternatif teorilerine vurgu yapmaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ekonomik Rasyonellik, Herbert Simon, Rasyonel Seçim Teorisi, Rasyonel Davranış, Rasyonellik

CRITICISM OF ECONOMIC RATIONALISM: HERBERT SIMON'S BOUNDED RATIONALISM ANALYSIS

Öz

Rationality emerges as a concept not only confined to economic dimensions but also encompassing philosophical, social, and psychological aspects. Therefore, a wide array of perspectives on rationality exists. One of these perspectives is the traditional economic approach, which presents rationality as an immutable assumption based on personal gain. The approach of full rationality has faced numerous criticisms. One such critique is the proposition of bounded rationality against full rationality, as advocated by Herbert Simon. Simon, in contrast to the classical economic view that summarizes utility as primarily reaching goals, evaluates decision-making as a process influenced by various external and internal factors rather than being solely at the disposal of an individual possessing complete information. Consequently, human decisions are viewed not as entirely optimal but rather as reaching a level of satisfaction that suffices to cease further exploration and evaluation. In contrast to the approach of full rationality, the satisfaction derived from individuals' choices stems not only from the fulfillment of personal interests but also encompasses the decision-maker's beliefs, social, and individual satisfaction. Despite Simon's research method being straightforward and transparent, it appears that the implications of his theory outweigh its methodology. If the cornerstone of economic theory, full rationality, fails to align with reality, it can be inferred that the traditional economic theory lacks the capability to offer practical solutions for understanding society and addressing its issues. The primary objective of this study is to investigate the concept of rationality not only from an economic standpoint but also from philosophical, social, and psychological perspectives, while emphasizing alternative theories of human behavior.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Economic Rationality, Herbert Simon, Rational Choice Theory, Rational Behavior, Rationality

Kaynakça

• Altman, M. (2012), Behavioral Economics for Dummies, New Jersey: John Wiley ve Sons.
• Ben-Ner, A. and Louis Putterman (1998), Economics, Values and Organization,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• BonJour, L. (1985). The Structure of Empirical Knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Brown, H. I. (2006). Rationality (Problems of Philosophy), Routledge.
• Chisholm, R. (1977). A Theory of Knowledge, Prentice Hall.
• Camerer, C. and Loewenstein, G. (2004), “Behavioral Economics: Past, Present, and Future,” in Advances in Behavioral Economics. Colin F. Camerer and George Loewenstein and Matthew Rabin, Eds., Princeton University Press, 3-53.
• Camerer, C. (2005), “Behavioral Economics”, In World Congress of the Econometric Society, 18-24 August 2005, London.
• Drakopoulos, S.A. (1994), “Hierarchical Choice in Economics”, Journal of Economic Surveys, 8, 133-153.
• Duchaine, B., Cosmides L. and J. Tooby (2001), “Evolutionary Psychology and the Brain”, Cognitive Neuroscience, 11,225-230.
• Elster, J. (1991), Rationality and Social Norms, European Journal of Sociology, 32 (1),109-129.
• Elster, J. (2007), Explaining Social Behavior: More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Elster, J. (2009), Reason and Rationality (Steven Rendall, Trans.), Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Engelen, B. (2007), Rationality and Institutions: an Inquiry into the Normative Implications of Rational Choice Theory (Doctoral Dissertation), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. Retrievedfrom:https://lirias.kuleuven.be/handle/1979/975
• Fllesdal, D. (1986). Intentionality and Rationality. In J. Margolis, M. Krausz, ve R.M. Burian (Eds.), Rationality,Dordrecht: Relativism and the Human Sciences.
• Foka-Kavalieraki, Y. and Aristides N. Hatzis (2011), “Rational after All: Toward an Improved Theory of Rationality in Economics”, Revue de Philosophie Economique, 12 (1), 3-51.
• Foley, R. (1988). Some Different Conceptions of Rationality. In McMillin (Ed.), Construction and Constraint.Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
• Frey, B.S. and Stutzer, A. (2007), “Economics and Psychology: Development and Issues”, in Economics and Psychology: A Promising New Cross Disciplinary Field, B.S. Frey and A. Stutzer, Eds., MIT Press (CESifo Seminar Series), 3-15.
• Gerrard, B.J. (1993), The Economics of Rationality. Routledge Press
• Hargreaves Heap, S. (1989), Rationality in Economics, Basil Blackwell Ltd.Stenmark, M. (1995). Rationality in Science, Religion, and Everyday Life.Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
• Hausman, D.M. and M.S McPherson (2006), Economic Analysis, Moral Philosophy, and Public Policy,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2nd Ed.
• Hindmoor, A. (2006), Rational Choice,Londra: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Mill, J.S (1967), The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume IV - Essays on Economics and Society Part I, John M. Robson, Ed., London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Retrieved from: the World Wide Web:https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/244
• Moser, P.K. (1990), Rationality in Action: Contemporary Approaches,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Mullainathan, Sendhil ve Richard H. Thaler (2000), "Behavioral Economics", NBER Working Paper, 7948.
• Russell, B. (1956). Human Society in Ethics and Politics.Crown Nest: Allen and Unwin.
• Stenmark, M. (1995). Rationality in Science, Religion, and Everyday Life.Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
• Sousa, R. (1990). The Rationality of Emotion. Cambridge.
• Simon, H. (1957), Models of Man: Social and Rational; Mathematical Essays on Rational Human Behavior in a Social Setting,New Jersey: John Wiley ve Sons, Inc.
• Simon, H. (1990), Alternative Visions of Rationality, in Rationality in Action: Contemporary Approaches. P.K. Moser, Ed., Cambridge University Press, 189-204.
• Skouras, Thanos, George J. Avlonitis, and Kostis A. Indounas (2005), “Economics and Marketing on Pricing: How and Why Do They Differ”, Journal of Product and Brand Management,14 (6), 362–374.
• Tepeler, M. İ.- Akan, Y. (2023). Davranışsal İktisadın Gelişimine Tarihsel Bir Bakış. Anasay 26, 64- 77.
• Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1981), “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice”, Science, 211 (4481), 453-458.
• Wilkinson, N, and Klaes, M. (2012), An Introduction to Behavioral Economics, Londra: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Von Wright, H. (1986), Rationality: Means and Ends. Epistemologia, 9.