Collective intentionality in economics: Making Searle's theory of institutional facts relevant for game theory

7Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

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.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free