Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Une forme minimale de coopération

  • Cédric Paternotte (a1)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 June 2009

ABSTRACT : Definitions of cooperative action usually provide sufficient rather than necessary conditions. I here define a minimal form of cooperation, which encompasses mass actions, such as demonstrations. Intentional, epistemic, strategic and teleological aspects, mainly obtained from a weakening of pre-existing concepts, are discussed. I also emphasize the key role played by game theoretic concepts in the definition of joint action. Finally, I claim that rationality is a necessary condition of minimal cooperation, whereas classical analysis merely sees rationality as a possible or desirable characteristic.

RÉSUMÉ : La plupart des nombreuses définitions existantes d’une action coopérative en fournissent des conditions suffisantes plutôt que nécessaires. Nous définissons ici une forme minimale de coopération, correspondant aux actions de masse, telles des manifestations. Nous en détaillons les aspects intentionnel, épistémique, stratégique et téléologique, généralement obtenus par affaiblissement spécifique de concepts classiques. Parallèlement, nous soulignons le rôle crucial de concepts issus de la théorie des jeux pour la définition d’une action coopérative. Enfin, nous soutenons que la rationalité d’une action coopérative minimale est cruciale à sa réalisation et pas seulement possible ou souhaitable comme le soutiennent les analyses habituelles.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

R. Aumann et A. Brandenburger 1995 «Epistemic Conditions for Nash Equilibrium», Econometrica, vol. 63, p. 1161-1180.

M. Bratman 1992 «Shared Cooperate Activity», The Philosophical Review, vol. 101, n° 2, p. 327-341.

M. Brewer et W. Gardner 1996 «Who is this “We”? Levels of Collective Identity and Self Identication», Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 71, p. 83-93.

S. Chant et Z. Ernst 2007 «Group Intentions as Equilibria», Philophical Studies, vol. 133, n° 1, p. 95-109.

R. Dawes 1980 «Social Dilemmas», Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 31, p. 169-193.

N. Gold et R. Sugden 2007 «Collective Intentions and Team Agency», Journal of Philosophy, vol. 104, n° 3, p. 109-137.

D. Kreps et R. Wilson 1982 «Reputation and Imperfect Information», Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 27, n° 2, p. 253-279.

A. Rapoport 1962 «Three Mode of Conflict», Management Science, vol. 7, n° 3, p. 210-218.

D. Regan 1980 Utilitarianism and Cooperation, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

H. Tajfel , M. Billig , R. Bundy et C. Flament 1971 «Social Categorization in Group Behavior», European Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 1, p. 149-178.

D. Tollefsen 2002 «Collective Intentionality and the Social Sciences», Philosophy of the Social Sciences, vol. 32, n° 1, p. 25-50.

R. Tuomela 2000 Cooperation — A Philosophical Study, Mechelen, Kluwer.

R. Tuomela 2007 The Philosophy of Sociality — The Shared Point of View, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

R. Tuomela et S. Miller 1988 «We-Intentions», Philosophical Studies, vol. 53, p. 367-389.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie
  • ISSN: 0012-2173
  • EISSN: 1759-0949
  • URL: /core/journals/dialogue-canadian-philosophical-review-revue-canadienne-de-philosophie
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *