One day after class, the professor, otherwise known for his aloofness, “superior airs,” and generally disdainful attitude, rather unexpectedly invited his students for a drink in the local joint. Roughly half of the students accepted and the other half excused themselves, but ended up in another bar that night.  

Answer Three Questions:

1. One day after class, the professor, otherwise known for his aloofness, “superior airs,” and generally disdainful attitude, rather unexpectedly invited his students for a drink in the local joint. Roughly half of the students accepted and the other half excused themselves, but ended up in another bar that night. 

Analyze the possible motives and self-perceptions of the professor, the students who joined him and the students who declined but got together elsewhere, from the point of view of George Homans’ exchange theory.

2. Many people in large “latent” groups actually engage in voting without any “selective incentives” or “mobilization”, realizing their virtually non-existent chances for affecting the outcome of the election. Is this a proof or a refutation of Mancur Olson’s theory?  In either case, can you think of another similar example?

3. Analyze the fund raising campaign by the public radio (KERA 90.1) in terms of Coleman’s theory. Specifically, how do the concepts of “free riding”, “zeal”, “non-closure” of the social network of the public radio audience, and facts such as offering of incentives, (mugs, tickets, meals, raffles, matching funds, chocolate, flowers, etc.) are analyzable in terms of Coleman’s theory.  You may substitute another similar charitable fundraising event for your analysis.

4. Explain two of the following dichotomies:

  Satisficing vs. Maximizing, Zero-sum vs. Coordination games, homo economicus vs. Homosociologicus.

5. Explain three of the following concepts:

   veil of ignorance, prisoner’s dilemma, greatest happiness for greatest number, private vices, public goods. In each case, use examples other than the ones         offered in the text.

6. Present a detailed defense of or a comprehensive criticism of the utilitarian or rational choice tradition, using the first volume’s section on Rational Utilitarian tradition, class discussions, and your own sympathies or antipathies.