The Expected Utility Theory of Conflict: Measuring Theoretical Progress

Abstract

We examine the “progressivity” of Bruce Bueno de Mesquita's theory of conflict as originally developed in The War Trap and as extended later. Bueno de Mesquita offers the progressivity of the expected utility theory relative to other theories and approaches to conflict as his major defense in responding to critics. Bueno de Mesquita essentially relies on Imre Lakatos' definition of theoretical progress in presenting his argument. A review of the literature addressing the concept of theoretical progress indicates that Bueno de Mesquita's application of Lakatosian criteria is incomplete and that Lakatos' criteria are themselves flawed. We review the philosophy of science literature dealing with theoretical progress or rational criteria for theory choice and evaluate the progressivity of the expected utility theory of conflict in light of criteria other than Lakatos'. While we do recommend further elaboration of Bueno de Mesquita's theory, we do not find it more progressive than its rivals.

The Realist Paradigm and Degenerative versus Progressive Research Programs: An Appraisal of Neotraditional Research on Waltz's Balancing Proposition

“…For a complete review, see the authors in Kegley 1995; see also Doyle 1986. traditional scholars (see Keohane [1983Keohane [ ] 1989. Although the appraisal of theories and the paradigms from which they are derived involves a number of criteria (see Simowitz and Price 1990), including, in particular, the criterion of empirical accuracy (the ability to pass tests) and the principle of falsifiability, the present analysis will apply only the main criterion on which Lakatos laid great stress for the evaluation of a series of theories: They must produce a progressive as opposed to a degenerating research program. Lakatos's criteria clearly stem from a more positivist perspective, but since realists and neorealists accept them, they are perfectly applicable.…”

Lakatos and Neorealism: A Reply to Vasquez

“…He only insists that practitioners should be aware of their alternatives, publicize the decisions they are making, and accept the consequences of their choices(Lakatos 1971b, 104-5). We agree withBlaug (1992, 37) that this position amounts to intellectual schizophrenia, and withMusgrave (1976, 473-82) that Lakatos's attempts to deny the methodology's role in providing advice for working scientists are inconsistent, unwise, and unnecessary.5 For scarce examples, seeBueno de Mesquita 1984;Bueno de Mesquita, Krasner, and Jervis 1985;Grieco 1995;Keohane 1986;and Simowitz and Price 1990. By contrast, economics has produced extensive discussions and applications(de Marchi 1991, 29-30).…”

Conceptual Problems in Theorizing About International Conflict

“…They argue that proposition 2 (Bueno de Mesquita 1985, 164), namely, that war is likely when both sides have positive expected utility for war, is inconsistent with the expected utility approach (p. 446). 4 Similarly, propositions 3, 4 and 6 (Bueno de Mesquita 1985) and proposition 6 in The War Trap (which is the same as proposition 7 in Simowitz and Price [1990]) are consistent with this approach, contrary to Simowitz and Price's claim. However, Bueno de Mesquita precedes proposition 2 with a six-paragraph discussion on negotiated settlements (other options) as an alternative to war and the status quo.…”

“…Roslyn Simowitz and Barry L. Price (1990) claim to find logical flaws in a number of propositions contained in Bruce Bueno de Mesquita's (1981Mesquita's ( , 1985 work. Roslyn Simowitz and Barry L. Price (1990) claim to find logical flaws in a number of propositions contained in Bruce Bueno de Mesquita's (1981Mesquita's ( , 1985 work.…”

“…LLn recent years, there has been considerable discussion regarding the applicability of rational choices models to the study of international conflict. Roslyn Simowitz and Barry L. Price (1990) claim to find logical flaws in a number of propositions contained in Bruce Bueno de Mesquita's (1981Mesquita's ( , 1985 work. Although they judge Bueno de Mesquita's work to be "the most exciting and ambitious effort" to develop an axiomatic deductive theory of international phenomena (p. 439), their criticisms, if correct, are quite damaging for the theory in The War Trap.…”