Contractarianism and Rational Choice

  • Maxim Storchevoy


In this chapter we will survey the rational choice approaches for normative ethics developed in the second part of the twentieth century. Some of these approaches belong to contractarian ethics but our main focus will be not on a social contract but on rational choice. We will survey and evaluate the contributions of several prominent thinkers (Rawls, Nozick, Sen, Harsanyi, and Scanlon) from the lens of the scientific approach to ethics to demonstrate that its principles have a crucial importance to the progress on normative ethics.


contractarian ethics rational choice veil of ignorance Rawls Nozick Gauthier Scanlon 


  1. Carroll, Sean. 2010a. The Moral Equivalent of the Parallel Postulate. Cosmic Variance, March 24.Google Scholar
  2. ———. 2010b. Sam Harris Responds. Cosmic Variance, March 29.Google Scholar
  3. ———. 2010c. Science and Morality: You Can’t Derive “Ought” from “Is.” Cosmic Variance, May 3.Google Scholar
  4. Gauthier, David P. 1967. Morality and Advantage. The Philosophical Review 76: 460–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. ———. 1969. The Logic of Leviathan: The Moral and Political Theory of Thomas Hobbes. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Gauthier, David. 1977. The Social Contract as Ideology. Philosophy & Public Affairs 6: 130–164.Google Scholar
  7. Harris, Sam. 2011. The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values. Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  8. Harsanyi, J. 1953. Cardinal Utility in Welfare Economics and in the Theory of Risk-Taking. Journal of Political Economy 61 (5): 434–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harsanyi, John C. 1975. Can the Maximin Principle Serve as a Basis for Morality? A Critique of John Rawls’s Theory. American Political Science Review 69 (2): 594–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. ———. 1977. Morality and the Theory of Rational Behavior. Social Research 44: 623–656.Google Scholar
  11. Kavka, Gregory S. 1987. Mind. New Series, 96(381): 117–121.Google Scholar
  12. Rawls, John. 1958. Justice as Fairness. The Philosophical Review 67: 164–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ———. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Scanlon, Thomas M. 1982. Contractualism and Utilitarianism. In Utilitarianism and Beyond, ed. Amartya Sen and Bernard Williams, 103–110. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Scanlon, Thomas. 1998. What We Owe to Each Other. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Sen, Amartya. 1974. Rawls Versus Bentham: An Axiomatic Examination of the Pure Distribution Problem. Theory and Decision 4 (3): 301–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maxim Storchevoy
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Graduate School of ManagementSt. Petersburg UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia
  2. 2.National Research University Higher School of EconomicsSt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations