Biology and Philosophy

, Volume 4, Issue 4, pp 457–481 | Cite as

How evolutionary biology challenges the classical theory of rational choice

  • W. S. Cooper


A fundamental philosophical question that arises in connection with evolutionary theory is whether the fittest patterns of behavior are always the most rational. Are fitness and rationality fully compatible? When behavioral rationality is characterized formally as in classical decision theory, the question becomes mathematically meaningful and can be explored systematically by investigating whether the optimally fit behavior predicted by evolutionary process models is decision-theoretically coherent. Upon investigation, it appears that in nontrivial evolutionary models the expected behavior is not always in accord with the norms of the standard theory of decision as ordinarily applied. Many classically irrational acts, e.g. betting on the occurrence of one event in the knowledge that the probabilities favor another, can under certain circumstances constitute adaptive behavior.

One interesting interpretation of this clash is that the criterion of rationality offered by classical decision theory is simply incorrect (or at least incomplete) as it stands, and that evolutionary theory should be called upon to provide a more generally applicable theory of rationality. Such a program, should it prove feasible, would amount to the logical reduction of the theory of rational choice to evolutionary theory.

Key words

Evolution evolutionary biology fitness decision theory theory of choice rationality rational behavior reductionism 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Carnap, R. & R. Jeffrey: 1971, Studies in Inductive and Probability (I), University of California Press, Los Angeles, California.Google Scholar
  2. Cooper, W. S.: 1978, Foundations of Logico-linguistics: A Unified Theory of Information, Language, and Logic, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland.Google Scholar
  3. Cooper, W. S.: 1981, ‘Natural Decision Theory: A General Formalism for the Analysis of Evolved Characteristics,’ Journal of Theoretical Biology 92, 401–415.Google Scholar
  4. Cooper, W. S.: 1984, ‘Expected Time to Extinction and the Concept of Fundamental Fitness,’ Journal of Theoretical Biology 107, 603–629.Google Scholar
  5. Cooper, W. S.: 1987, ‘Decision Theory as a Branch of Evolutionary Theory: A Biological Derivation of the Savage Axioms,’ Psychological Review 94 (4), 395–411.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper, W. S.: 1988, Is Classical Rationality Always Adaptive? Xeroxed report, S.L.I.S., Univ. of California, Berkeley CA 94720.Google Scholar
  7. Cooper, W. S. & R. H. Kaplan: 1982, ‘Adaptive “Coin-flipping”: A Decision-theoretic Examination of Natural Selection for Random Individual Variation’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 94, 135–151.Google Scholar
  8. Crow, J. F. & M. Kimura: 1970, An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory, Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  9. de Finetti, B.: 1974, Theory of Probability: A Critical Introductory Treatment, John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Endler, J. A.: 1986, Natural Selection In the Wild, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  11. Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P. & Lichtenstein, S.: 1980, ‘Knowing What You Want: Measuring Labile Values, ’ in T. S. Wallsten (ed.), Cognitive Processes in Choice and Decision Behavior, L. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 117–141.Google Scholar
  12. Fishburn, P. C.: 1981, ‘Subjective Expected Utility: A Review of Normative Theories,’ Theory and Decision 13, 139–199.Google Scholar
  13. Fisher, R. A.: 1930, The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, Dover Publications, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Gillespie, J. H.: 1974, ‘Natural Selection for Within-generation Variance in Offspring Nmbers,’ Genetics 76 601–606.Google Scholar
  15. Gillespie, J. H.: 1977, ‘Natural Selection for Variances in Offspring Numbers: A New Evolutionary Principle,’ American Naturalist 111, 1010–1014.Google Scholar
  16. Haldane, J. B. S.: 1949, ‘Parental and Fraternal Correlations for Fitness,’ Ann. Eugen. 14, 288–292.Google Scholar
  17. Hutchinson, G. E.: 1981, ‘Random Adaptation and Imitation in Human Evolution’, American Scientist 69, 161–165.Google Scholar
  18. Kaplan, R. H. & W. S. Cooper: 1984, ‘The Evolution of Developmental Plasticity in Reproductive Characteristics: An Application of the ‘Adaptive Coin-flipping’ Principle,’ American Naturalist 123, 393–410.Google Scholar
  19. Kaplan, R. H., P. C. Phillips, & W. S. Cooper: 1987, Intra-genotypic Strategy Mixing in Small Populations: A Simulation Study, xeroxed report, Dept. of Biology, Reed College, Portland, OR 97202.Google Scholar
  20. Latane, H. A., D. L. Tuttle, & C. P. Jones: 1975, Security Analysis and Portfolio Management (2nd ed.), Ronald Press Co., New York.Google Scholar
  21. MacArthur, R. H. & Wilson, E. O.: 1967, The Theory of Island Biogeography, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  22. Mertz, D. B.: 1970, ‘Notes on the Methods Used in Life History Studies,’ in J. H. Connell, D. B. Mertz & W. W. Murdoch (eds.), Readings in Ecology and Ecological Genetics, Harper and Row, New York, pp. 4–17.Google Scholar
  23. Raiffa, H.: 1968, Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choices Under Uncertainly, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.Google Scholar
  24. Ramsey, F. P.: 1926, ‘Truth and Probability,’ in R. B. Brathwaite (Ed.), The Foundations of Mathematics and Other Logical Essays, The Humanities Press, New York (1950).Google Scholar
  25. Savage, L.: 1954/1972, The Foundations of Statistics (2nd ed.), Dover, New York.Google Scholar
  26. Stearns, S. C.: 1982, ‘On Fitness,’ in D. Mossakowski & G. Roth (eds.), Environmental Adaptation and Evolution, Gustav Fischer, New York, pp. 3–18.Google Scholar
  27. Tiger, L. & Fox, R.: 1971, The Imperial Animal, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.Google Scholar
  28. von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O.: 1953, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (3rd ed.). Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  29. Waddington, C. H.: 1957, The Strategy of the Genes, George Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
  30. Walker, T. J.: 1986, ‘Stochastic Polyphenism: Coping with Uncertainty,’ The Florida Entomologist 62, 46–62.Google Scholar
  31. Wilson, E. O.: 1975, Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  32. Wright, S.: 1931, ‘Evolution in Mendellian Populations,’ Genetics 16, 97–159.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. S. Cooper
    • 1
  1. 1.S.L.I.S.University of CaliforniaBerkeleyU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations