This discussion of rat choice is especially interesting because it reveals very
different perspectives as to what it is: evolutionary rationality, group
rationality, agent rationality. It seems to me that the non-game theory version
of rat choice, i.e., strategic choice arguments are, in fact agent oriented.
Strategic choice seeks to understand and predict what agents will do under
specific rules. That is, individuals operate in some structure of rules. When we
understand what the rules are we can generally assume that individuals will
usually (not always) choose an alternative that will best suit his/her needs or
desires. In the relative absence of rules (uncertainty of a high order) agents
will usually seek to establish rules which will benefit them. Rat or strategic
choice doesn't argue that individuals are ruled simply by their own interests
without regard to a body of rules which constrains behavior in their societies,
organizations, groups, etc.