Part I
In line with the model of rational choice, Joe would respond by making a decision that would be rational or logical based on either a scenario that would be of interest to him or one based on preference (Hooker, 2013). He has to respond in a way that concurs with his objectives, which would make him feel satisfied. In this case, he gets relief from the invitation as his relationship with his friend Bill had become strained and, therefore, he is interested in mending things with him, which would make him satisfied. Accepting the invitation would be a step towards rectifying their strained relationship. At the same time, having buried himself in work while trying to secure the renewal of the contract, Joe would prefer to enjoy a breeze in Bill's yacht, away from the usual home environment that they get to be in every day. Therefore, Joe would accept the invitation even if his wife would object.
Results of applying rational choice model may only be of benefit to the decision maker, in this case, Joe, whom according to the model, would be acting in his self-interest. It limits the contributions of other involved parties, for instance, Joe's wife who may prefer to enjoy the private company of her husband. At the same time, the results of this model may not be agreed with since it may fail to tell some particular circumstances involved in decision making. It fails to give accommodation of the case's structural features, which may be unique to it (Hodgson, 2003). Other members of Bill's family, for instance, may have wanted to spend the time alone without outsiders.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Part II
The ethical theory of utilitarianism supports the recommended response of accepting the invitation. The argument goes beyond the interests of Joe, the decision maker, and accounts for the benefits of the other parties according to the online guide on ethics and moral theories Utilitarian Theories. When he decides to accept the invitation from his friend Bill, Joe will be considering the interests of his friend. At the same time, he may be looking out for his wife, who would be in a new environment in the yacht instead of being around the same home environment. In as much as he may have planned to do some things in preparation for the meeting with his management team, Joe would accept the invitation just so the two families would have an excellent time in the company of the other, catching up. It would mean his choice is to ensure maximization of the happiness of the highest number of people and not he alone. Utilitarianism would be useful for it supports making choices that would lead to the maximization of utility of the highest number of people, which means more people would benefits as opposed to acting on self-interest.
The alternative recommendation would be to say no to the invitation, applying the theory of ethical egoism where he would make a decision that would be in his self-interest, which would mean saying no if that is what would be of interest to him. Both the recommendation and the alternative would be beneficial, even though egoism would only benefit Joe. Utilitarianism, on the other hand, would mean maximized utility for the members of both families. Utilitarianism would make Joe try to satisfy the needs of others which he may not have a more in-depth insight of and would, at the same time, mean intruding into their privacy. Egoism, on the other hand, would let him focus on his own needs, which he knows best (Rachels 2012).
Reference
Hodgson, G., (2003). On the Limits of Rational Choice Theory.
Hooker, J. N., (2013). Moral implications of rational choice theories. Handbook of the philosophical foundations of business ethics , 1459-1476.
Online Guide to Ethics and Moral Philosophy. Utilitarian Theories Retrieved from http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/Cavalier/80130/part2/sect9.html Accessed on 5 May 29, 2019
Rachels, J., (2012). Ethical Egoism. Ethical Theory: An Anthology , 14 , 193.
