ABSTRACT
The "Rational Choice Model" is of utmost importance for two reasons. First, because in the cases where it can legitimately be applied, it leads to final explanations, while explanations using concepts such as the "internalization of norms," "socialization," etc., lead to further questions as to which mechanisms are hidden behind them. Second, it explains efficiently a host of social phenomena, as recognized already by classical sociologists as Tocqueville or presociologists as Rousseau. Following Max Weber's lead, one should introduce additionally the notion of "cognitive rationality" to describe explanations of form. As the "Rational Choice Model" in its current version has little to say on beliefs or on actions grounded on beliefs, the sociologist who has to explain a belief or an action inspired by some belief will turn easily to irrational explanations. The "cognitivist" model appears as more useful than the "Rational Choice Model" as soon as non-trivial beliefs appear as an essential ingredient of social action.
