Abstract
Economic theories of team reasoning build on the assumption that agents can sometimes behave according to beliefs or preferences attributed to a group or a team. In this paper, I propose a different framework to introduce collective intentionality into game theory. I build on John Searle's account, which makes collective intentionality constitutive of institutional facts. I show that as soon as one accepts that institutions (conventions, social norms, legal rules) are required to solve indetermination problems in a game, it is necessary to assume a form of collective intentionality that comes from what I call a common understanding of the situation among the players. This common understanding embodies the epistemic requirements for an institution to be a correlated equilibrium in a game. As a consequence, I question recent claims made by some economists according to which game-theoretic accounts of institutions do not need to assume collective intentionality.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Hédoin, C. (2013). Collective intentionality in economics: Making Searle’s theory of institutional facts relevant for game theory. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, 6(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v6i1.117
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.