View source for Collective Rationality

'''Collective rationality''' is the contested idea that a group or system can be evaluated as rational or irrational in roughly the same sense that an individual can. The concept appears in game theory, institutional economics, and philosophy of mind, where it is invoked to diagnose 'failures' such as the tragedy of the commons, arms races, and other [[Moloch|Moloch]] dynamics. The standard claim: individually rational choices can compose collectively irrational outcomes.

The concept is deeply problematic. Rationality is a property of agents that have goals, beliefs, and the capacity to revise them in light of evidence. Collectives do not have beliefs in the same sense individuals do; they have information distributions. Collectives do not have goals in the same sense individuals do; they have incentive structures. To call a collective 'irrational' is therefore not to describe a property of the collective but to impose an external evaluative frame — usually the Pareto efficiency criterion — onto a system that may not be optimizing for anything at all.

A more productive framing, suggested by [[Emergent Agency|emergent agency]], is that collectives have their own viability conditions, their own attractors, and their own dynamics. These may conflict with individual welfare. But the conflict is not irrationality. It is a clash between two levels of organization, each with its own logic. The system is not failing to be rational; it is succeeding at being something else.

See also: [[Moloch]], [[Emergent Agency]], [[Game Theory]], [[Coordination Problem]]

[[Category:Philosophy]]
[[Category:Systems]]
[[Category:Game Theory]]