S. M. Amadae is a University Lecturer of Politics in the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Helsinki, and a 2020 Berggruen Fellow at the Center for the Advanced Study of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University. She is also affiliated with Science and Technology Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Address: Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
A new era for our species started in 1945: with the terrifying demonstration of the power of the ... more A new era for our species started in 1945: with the terrifying demonstration of the power of the atom bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, the potential global catastrophic consequences of human technology could no longer be ignored. Within the field of global catastrophic and existential risk, nuclear war is one of the more iconic scenarios, although significant uncertainties remain about its likelihood and potential destructive magnitude.2 The risk posed to humanity from nuclear weapons is not static. In tandem with geopolitical and cultural changes, technological innovations could have a significant impact on how the risk of the use of nuclear weapons changes over time. Increasing attention has been given in the literature to the impact of digital technologies, and in particular autonomy and machine learning, on nuclear risk. Most of this attention has focused on ‘first-order’ effects: the introduction of technologies into nuclear command-and-control and weapon-delivery systems...
This review essay of Economics Rules situates Dani Rodrik's contribution with respect to the ... more This review essay of Economics Rules situates Dani Rodrik's contribution with respect to the 2007-2008 global economic crisis This financial meltdown, which the eurozone did not fully recover from before the Covid-19 pandemic, led to soul-searching among economists as well as a call for heterodox economic approaches Yet, over the past decade, instead the economics profession has maintained its orthodoxy Rodrik's Economics Rules offers a critique of the economics profession that is castigating but mild It calls for economists to use more and diverse models without becoming wedded to any single model or an overarching vision Yet Rodrik ratifies many of the benchmark models standard to orthodox economics and provides little ground for a fundamental rethinking of the discipline This essay analyses the conservatism underlying Rodrik's approach, which upholds general equilibrium theory and rational expectations underlying the efficient market hypothesis It argues that the econ...
In Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy , S. M. Amadae tells the remarkable story of how rational c... more In Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy , S. M. Amadae tells the remarkable story of how rational choice theory rose from obscurity to become the intellectual bulwark of capitalist democracy. Amadae roots Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy in the turbulent post-World War II era, showing how rational choice theory grew out of the RAND Corporation's efforts to develop a "science" of military and policy decisionmaking. But while the first generation of rational choice theorists—William Riker, Kenneth Arrow, and James Buchanan—were committed to constructing a "scientific" approach to social science research, they were also deeply committed to defending American democracy from its Marxist critics. Amadae reveals not only how the ideological battles of the Cold War shaped their ideas but also how those ideas may today be undermining the very notion of individual liberty they were created to defend.
Preliminaries: 1. Neoliberalism 2. Prisoner's Dilemma Part I. War: Introduction 3. Assurance ... more Preliminaries: 1. Neoliberalism 2. Prisoner's Dilemma Part I. War: Introduction 3. Assurance 4. Deterrence Part II. Government: Introduction 5. Hobbesian anarchy 6. Social contract 7. Unanimity 8. Consent 9. Collective action Part III. Evolution: Introduction 10. Selfish gene 11. Tit for tat Conclusion 12. Pax Americana.
In "Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy," S. M. Amadae tells the remarkable story of how... more In "Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy," S. M. Amadae tells the remarkable story of how rational choice theory rose from obscurity to become the intellectual bulwark of capitalist democracy. Amadae roots "Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy" in the turbulent post-World War II era, showing how rational choice theory grew out of the RAND Corporation's efforts to develop a "science" of military and policy decisionmaking. But while the first generation of rational choice theorists William Riker, Kenneth Arrow, and James Buchanan were committed to constructing a "scientific" approach to social science research, they were also deeply committed to defending American democracy from its Marxist critics. Amadae reveals not only how the ideological battles of the Cold War shaped their ideas but also how those ideas may today be undermining the very notion of individual liberty they were created to defend."
This chapter uncovers the complex negotiations for authority in various representations about fut... more This chapter uncovers the complex negotiations for authority in various representations about futures of life which have been advanced by different branches of the sciences, and have culminated in the emerging concept of life as algorithm. It charts the historical shifts in expertise and representations of life, from naturalists, to mathematical modellers, and specialists in computation, and argues that physicists, game theorists, and economists now take a leading role in explaining and projecting futures of life. The chapter identifies Richard Dawkins and Max Tegmark at the forefront of the concept of life as algorithm: the first inspired by game theory as a means to study evolution; the second proposing that a materialist basis of life could place humans and artificial intelligence on an equal footing. Through close reading of their respective texts, the chapter demonstrates that both thinkers consider life as an algorithm programmed to achieve success in survival and reproduction.
Team reasoning gives a simple, coherent, and rational explanation for human cooperative behavior ... more Team reasoning gives a simple, coherent, and rational explanation for human cooperative behavior (Bacharach 1999; Sugden 1993). This paper investigates the robustness of team reasoning as an explanation for cooperative behavior, by assessing its long-run viability. We consider an evolutionary game theoretic model in which the population consists of team reasoners and ‘conventional’ individual reasoners. We find that changes in the ludic environment can affect evolutionary outcomes, and that in many circumstances, team reasoning may thrive, even under conditions that, at first glance, may seem unfavorable. We also pursue several extensions that augment the basic account, and conclude that team reasoning is an evolutionarily viable mechanism with the potential to explain behavior in a range of human interactions.
This forum contribution addresses two major themes in de Goede’s original essay on ‘Financial sec... more This forum contribution addresses two major themes in de Goede’s original essay on ‘Financial security’: (1) the relationship between stable markets and the proverbial ‘security dilemma’; and (2) the development of new decision-technologies to address risk in the post-World War II period. Its argument is that the confluence of these two themes through rational choice theory represents a fundamental re-evaluation of the security dilemma and its relationship to the rule of law governing market relations, ushering in an era of perpetual physical and financial insecurity.
Francesco Guala has written an important book proposing a new account of social institutions and ... more Francesco Guala has written an important book proposing a new account of social institutions and criticizing existing ones. We focus on Guala’s critique of collective acceptance theories of institutions, widely discussed in the literature of collective intentionality. Guala argues that at least some of the collective acceptance theories commit their proponents to antinaturalist methodology of social science. What is at stake here is what kind of philosophizing is relevant for the social sciences. We argue that a Searlean version of collective acceptance theory can be defended against Guala’s critique and question the sufficiency of Guala’s account of the ontology of the social world.
A new era for our species started in 1945: with the terrifying demonstration of the power of the ... more A new era for our species started in 1945: with the terrifying demonstration of the power of the atom bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, the potential global catastrophic consequences of human technology could no longer be ignored. Within the field of global catastrophic and existential risk, nuclear war is one of the more iconic scenarios, although significant uncertainties remain about its likelihood and potential destructive magnitude.2 The risk posed to humanity from nuclear weapons is not static. In tandem with geopolitical and cultural changes, technological innovations could have a significant impact on how the risk of the use of nuclear weapons changes over time. Increasing attention has been given in the literature to the impact of digital technologies, and in particular autonomy and machine learning, on nuclear risk. Most of this attention has focused on ‘first-order’ effects: the introduction of technologies into nuclear command-and-control and weapon-delivery systems...
This review essay of Economics Rules situates Dani Rodrik's contribution with respect to the ... more This review essay of Economics Rules situates Dani Rodrik's contribution with respect to the 2007-2008 global economic crisis This financial meltdown, which the eurozone did not fully recover from before the Covid-19 pandemic, led to soul-searching among economists as well as a call for heterodox economic approaches Yet, over the past decade, instead the economics profession has maintained its orthodoxy Rodrik's Economics Rules offers a critique of the economics profession that is castigating but mild It calls for economists to use more and diverse models without becoming wedded to any single model or an overarching vision Yet Rodrik ratifies many of the benchmark models standard to orthodox economics and provides little ground for a fundamental rethinking of the discipline This essay analyses the conservatism underlying Rodrik's approach, which upholds general equilibrium theory and rational expectations underlying the efficient market hypothesis It argues that the econ...
In Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy , S. M. Amadae tells the remarkable story of how rational c... more In Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy , S. M. Amadae tells the remarkable story of how rational choice theory rose from obscurity to become the intellectual bulwark of capitalist democracy. Amadae roots Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy in the turbulent post-World War II era, showing how rational choice theory grew out of the RAND Corporation's efforts to develop a "science" of military and policy decisionmaking. But while the first generation of rational choice theorists—William Riker, Kenneth Arrow, and James Buchanan—were committed to constructing a "scientific" approach to social science research, they were also deeply committed to defending American democracy from its Marxist critics. Amadae reveals not only how the ideological battles of the Cold War shaped their ideas but also how those ideas may today be undermining the very notion of individual liberty they were created to defend.
Preliminaries: 1. Neoliberalism 2. Prisoner's Dilemma Part I. War: Introduction 3. Assurance ... more Preliminaries: 1. Neoliberalism 2. Prisoner's Dilemma Part I. War: Introduction 3. Assurance 4. Deterrence Part II. Government: Introduction 5. Hobbesian anarchy 6. Social contract 7. Unanimity 8. Consent 9. Collective action Part III. Evolution: Introduction 10. Selfish gene 11. Tit for tat Conclusion 12. Pax Americana.
In "Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy," S. M. Amadae tells the remarkable story of how... more In "Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy," S. M. Amadae tells the remarkable story of how rational choice theory rose from obscurity to become the intellectual bulwark of capitalist democracy. Amadae roots "Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy" in the turbulent post-World War II era, showing how rational choice theory grew out of the RAND Corporation's efforts to develop a "science" of military and policy decisionmaking. But while the first generation of rational choice theorists William Riker, Kenneth Arrow, and James Buchanan were committed to constructing a "scientific" approach to social science research, they were also deeply committed to defending American democracy from its Marxist critics. Amadae reveals not only how the ideological battles of the Cold War shaped their ideas but also how those ideas may today be undermining the very notion of individual liberty they were created to defend."
This chapter uncovers the complex negotiations for authority in various representations about fut... more This chapter uncovers the complex negotiations for authority in various representations about futures of life which have been advanced by different branches of the sciences, and have culminated in the emerging concept of life as algorithm. It charts the historical shifts in expertise and representations of life, from naturalists, to mathematical modellers, and specialists in computation, and argues that physicists, game theorists, and economists now take a leading role in explaining and projecting futures of life. The chapter identifies Richard Dawkins and Max Tegmark at the forefront of the concept of life as algorithm: the first inspired by game theory as a means to study evolution; the second proposing that a materialist basis of life could place humans and artificial intelligence on an equal footing. Through close reading of their respective texts, the chapter demonstrates that both thinkers consider life as an algorithm programmed to achieve success in survival and reproduction.
Team reasoning gives a simple, coherent, and rational explanation for human cooperative behavior ... more Team reasoning gives a simple, coherent, and rational explanation for human cooperative behavior (Bacharach 1999; Sugden 1993). This paper investigates the robustness of team reasoning as an explanation for cooperative behavior, by assessing its long-run viability. We consider an evolutionary game theoretic model in which the population consists of team reasoners and ‘conventional’ individual reasoners. We find that changes in the ludic environment can affect evolutionary outcomes, and that in many circumstances, team reasoning may thrive, even under conditions that, at first glance, may seem unfavorable. We also pursue several extensions that augment the basic account, and conclude that team reasoning is an evolutionarily viable mechanism with the potential to explain behavior in a range of human interactions.
This forum contribution addresses two major themes in de Goede’s original essay on ‘Financial sec... more This forum contribution addresses two major themes in de Goede’s original essay on ‘Financial security’: (1) the relationship between stable markets and the proverbial ‘security dilemma’; and (2) the development of new decision-technologies to address risk in the post-World War II period. Its argument is that the confluence of these two themes through rational choice theory represents a fundamental re-evaluation of the security dilemma and its relationship to the rule of law governing market relations, ushering in an era of perpetual physical and financial insecurity.
Francesco Guala has written an important book proposing a new account of social institutions and ... more Francesco Guala has written an important book proposing a new account of social institutions and criticizing existing ones. We focus on Guala’s critique of collective acceptance theories of institutions, widely discussed in the literature of collective intentionality. Guala argues that at least some of the collective acceptance theories commit their proponents to antinaturalist methodology of social science. What is at stake here is what kind of philosophizing is relevant for the social sciences. We argue that a Searlean version of collective acceptance theory can be defended against Guala’s critique and question the sufficiency of Guala’s account of the ontology of the social world.
Uploads
Papers by SM Amadae