1. Is expected utility theory a satisfactory account of individual rationality?

Often than not, human beings (agents) are faced with choices and they have to reason out the facts
based on their knowledge, facts, expectations and desires. (Cite). Therefore, rationality can be said to
entail acting a particular manner after reasoning or some thought process on the available knowledge
and facts. Individuals evaluate the facts of reality with the notion that they have a cause-effect
relationship. As such, they most likely choose to act in ways whose effects are in line with their desires,
values, preferences and prospects. However, at times individuals are unsure of the outcomes of their
actions; prompting philosophers to enquire how individuals make choices whose outcomes are
uncertain (Resnik, 1987). In this paper, an individual/s or agents are considered to be people who are
capable of reasoning and acting accordingly.

The expected utility theory of rationality is one of the major theories that have been put forth as an
account of individual choice of action during uncertainty. According, to the expected utility theory of
rationality, individuals make decisions based on the states, act and outcomes, with outcomes being
dependent on the acts and states in context and states being beyond the agents control (Resnik, 1987).
For example, one may choose to get a flu vaccination or not. In this case, netting/not getting vaccinated
is the act, presence of the flu virus in the environment is the state and whether the agent catches the flu
is the outcome. Expected utility theorists postulate that such choices are informed by the expected
utility/importance/value of their actions, where they choose actions that have the highest expected
utility. The expected utility of an action results from assigning numerical values to the values of actions
to an individual in an ordinal scale and multiplying those values with their respective probability of
occurring (cite). In this regard, in the flu example, a person may choose to get vaccinated if the value of
utility healthy is high and the probability of getting ill is also high. This notion of expected utility is self-
evident in many situations. But states, actions and outcomes in the real world are sometimes far more
complicated. This begs the question as to whether the expected utility theory can explain individual
rationality entirely. In consideration of the complexities of decision-making, the answer is no.

Indeed, agents sometimes make choices with the aim of gaining some form utility, individual good,
happiness, or pleasure. However, the theory does not account for situations where the utility of an
action is not obvious. Prescriptively, the expected utility theory suggests that individual should take
actions whose utilities dominate/are greater others’ (resnik). However the theory fails in that I does not
account for the fact that at times, “the act we choose affects the probabilities of the states.” As an
example, Resnik (1987) indicates that in state-state confrontation, one nation’s dirarming cauld increase
the probability of the other attack while while arming would reduce the likelihood of war. Therefore

In line witrh the theory’s notion that agents act depending on the expected utility/good /preference, the
theory unsatisfactory in that while it postulates that

Notwithstanding, the expected utility theory of rationality remains relevant in society as it forms basis
of normative action whereby agents, actions are be evaluated in consideration of the rationalization of
expected outcomes in regard to the sates in context. As such the theory is prescriptive of hoe
individuals should act. In recognition of this, agents in the society often use the expected utility concept
as a guide to making choices during uncertainty. Furthermore, the theory is instrumental in predicting,
interpreting individual actions in society. (Cite buchak) Therefore, while the theory fails in explaining
behaviors in all concepts, it is satisfactory in accounting to individual behavior in other contexts.

2. Can expected utility theory satisfactorily represent our ethical commitments?

No. The expected utility theory cannot satisfactorily represent our actions. Ethics

3. Is collective choice possible?

4. Are interpersonal comparisons of utility possible?

5. Would rational individuals necessarily prefer to live in a utilitarian society?

Resnik, Michael D. Choices: An introduction to decision theory. U of Minnesota Press, 1987.

Briggs, Rachael. "Normative theories of rational choice: Expected utility."

(2014).

Harvard