One of the dominant theories of political theory is the idea of rational choice. It basically holds that people rationally choose to perform specific actions to fulfill their self-interest. But this approach has always had limitations in explaining certain actions, such as altruism. Monroe seeks to examine the validity of traditional rational explanations of altruism.

In constructing her study Monroe decided to focus her analysis through interviewing numerous individuals that fall into four broad groups: Entrepreneurs (people who made significant amounts of money through innovation); Philanthropists (wealthy individuals who give away significant sums of money); Heroes (ordinary people who risk there lives helping others); and Rescuers (people who saved Jews in WWII). If you read nothing else from this book read the chapters recounted some of these peoples stories, they are pretty amazing. After presenting some of these individuals, Monroe seeks to examine the evidence through four traiditonal modes of explaining altruistic behavior and she finds each one lacking.

Having found the traditional explanations inadequate she presents an adimtedly partial new theory of ethical political behavior: perspective. Perspective is how one views themselves in relation to others. Monroe found that altruists all shared a similar vision of a universal, common humanity in which all people are essentially the same. Monroe uses this view to suggest a reapplication of rational choice theory. Where our basic identity is involved with a particular choice, people are not going to seriously engage in rational analysis, they feel as if there is no choice. One example given is an Orthodox Jew who doesn't see eating at a kosher establishment as a choice. But where choices do not implicate our basic idenity, traditional rational analysis kicks in.

Of course the study has its limitations, princably in its small numbers. Only a couple of dozen individuals were examined for this study and this raises some concerns for the ability to generalize the results. But the only real way for such a study to be conducted is through small numbers because of the complexity of the task. I look foward to further studies seeking to test her conclusion against new sets of evidence. While the reading can get somewhat dull in points this book is well worth the effort.