In order to offer a necessary introduction to the issue of planned socio-cultural changes, attempts have been made in the present paper to elucidate the theory of rational choice through a sociological approach. Inspired by the instrumental rationality of Max Weber and within the framework of methodological individualism, the rational choice considers the action of those actors rational who among the existing possible choices within the framework of their beliefs and in the light of their consequences choose the option which is the best way to achieve their goals. The most important theories stemming from the rational choice theory are the decision theory, game theory, and collective action theory. Also the theories of rational choice are critically discussed in details which include the theories of Max Weber, John Harsanyi, James Colman, Reymond Bouddon and John Elster. Pure rational critics in this field have created a new approach to the theory of rational choice which is called social rationalism or rational-social choice, in which the values, norms and other social aspects have entered the rational action to show rationality in the everyday life on its basis and also analyze some of the limitations of rationality.

During the internal crisis of Syria, a geopolitically and geo-strategically significant country in West Asia, the behavior and measures of the local, regional and international actors emerged differently. America, as a superpower seeking global interests, tried to serve its interests as well as those of its regional allies through an interventionist approach to the Syrian crisis. Initially, it sought to overthrow the Assad regime and hit its allies by supporting the Syrian Arab opposition. With the Syrian government's legal request of Iran and Russia to enter the country and disrupt the balance of power in Syria, the Americans failed to achieve their primary goals. The feebleness and defeat of the Arab opposition against the Syrian government and its allies pushed the Americans closer to the Kurds so that they could make use of Kurdish interests in Syria for supporting their own interests. The main question of this research entails the components of US strategy and goals in relation to the Kurds in the events of Syria. The hypothesis answering the key question proposes that US foreign policy toward the Syrian Kurds is rationally developed to disturb the balance of Iran-Russia-Syria alliance and the resistance axis and prevent Turkish excessive ambition. This is a descriptive-analytical research using library resources for data collection. The results indicated that America's proximity to the Kurds has been successful in establishing a Kurdish entity and employing it for encountering the mentioned threats since the alliance until 2019.

One of the most important issues in various areas of life is decision making. Although it is originated from strategic management but now it can be considered as a necessary part of the research in security studies. The study tries to analyze rational choice decision making theory and its flaws. According to the hypothesis of the study rational choice theory, faces many flaws because it is very hard to gather information needed for decision-makers, and the insurance needed to act. Moreover, the cost and benefit analysis for this kind of decision making force managers to reach maximum gain which is impossible in many circumstances. In security matters, mainly poor and invalid information makes decision makers to act on their instincts which is not possible according to rational choice model. This paper enjoys the descriptive- analytical methodology and the data gathered through library documents.

The rational choice theories are empowered on explaining the instrumental crimes such as fraud, malversation and other financial crimes. It is due to the consonant of economic human as agent who can evaluate the costs and benefits of consequences his behavior and the financial nature if instrumental crimes. One of the crucial assumptions of rational choice theory is to consider human being as people who are aware and their behavior is egoistic. There is not any harmony between the real society and mentioned assumption, as we can see there are lots of cooperative behaviors among people. The rational choice theories are not successful in explaining criminal decision making cognitive process. On the other hand, evolutionary psychology as an interactional approach tries to explain that the fraudulently behaviors which end to instrumental crimes, are emerge from cooperative and sustainable strategies. Cooperative and sustainable strategies are emerged as the consequences of evolutionary psychological mechanism such as theory of mind, empathy and the sense of fairness that are related to cooperative strategies. In some cases these mechanisms pave the way for transmission and stability of cooperative behaviors,but in some occasions they provide necessary situation for executing free riding strategies for people. This is a descriptive analytic study that is based on fundamental orientation. The data of this paper has been collected based on secondary resources.

This Article deals with the impacts of religiosity on collective actions in social dilemma situations. Religiosity is one of the factors that effect on actions in social dilemma situations. In this article, we have tried to deal with the impact of religiosity on collective actions using rational choice approach. Research independent variables were: religiosity and cooperative actions based on religion. The results showed significant relations of religiosity and cooperative actions based on religion with cooperative actions in social dilemma situations .So we conclude that the rate of cooperative actions in social dilemma will increase by increasing the rate of religiosity and the hypothesis of research is satisfied.

Realizing the motivation of human behavior has been one of the most significant issues of human beings. In this regard, there are two approaches: egoism and altruism; egoism considers the motive of all human benevolent actions to be self-interest. but altruism considers all these kinds of behaviors as merely providing another’s welfare. Daniel Batson and Thomas Nagel are supporters of altruism in different ways. Batson advocated psychological altruism by an empirical approach and offered altruism-empathy hypothesis, while challenging egoism. Existence of motivation for altruism in human nature was proved. The emotional feeling of empathetic concern creates an altruistic motive for the well-being of others.Nagel defended the possibility of the rational motivation of altruism with a Interpretive methodarguing unbiased altruism is a requirement of rationality so it is purely moral and it is an undeniable condition of morality and fundamental principle. Batson's altruism is not necessarily moral, and he tends to put together self- interest and other-interest motives.Descriptive-analytical approach was used to evaluate their views. It has been indicated that their perceptions of altruism and its relationship to morality are distinct, but they can be supporter for each other in rejecting pure egoism and defending pure altruism.