نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
زبان و ادبیات فارسی دانشگاه شهرکرد، شهرکرد، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
In a social dilemma, the actor faces a conflict between two options: non-cooperative (seeking immediate self-interest) and cooperative (seeking collective interest or long-term self-interest through collective interest). The pros and cons of each one must be evaluated to make a rational choice. This research aims to explain the characters' actions in social dilemmas in the Shahnameh based on the rational choice theory and using a descriptive-analytical method. The results show that the Shahnameh, characters have been in a social dilemma as whether or not to give yes or no response to children's marriage proposal, whether or not to send hostages, and to save one's life or protect the country in the battlefield. Evaluating the consequences, they chose the most advantageous option for themselves and the community. Therefore, the actors' rational choice has been of the cooperative type and their choice has been an interest-oriented one. Their decision-making rule is both the rule of maximum such that the king of Yemen, Afrasiab, and Rostam determined the worst consequences of each option and then picked the best option among the worst. The expected benefit rule was such that, in the dilemma of Zal and Roudabeh wedding, Sam chose the consequence with the maximum expected interest.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
الف) کتاب ها
ب) مقالات
2.جلالپور شیوا و سید محسن البرزی(1398)، «نظریه انتخاب عقلانی و تکثرگرایی: یک مقایسه تطبیقی»، مطالعات کاربردی در علوم اجتماعی و جامعه شناسی، سال2، شماره 1، صص 63-72.
)