Gabrielle Scotto
Università degli studi di Torino
Throughout life we are always faced with choices. These choices can be of great impact and influence, or they can involve dramatic and extreme situations. But choices must also be made through mundane and ordinary situations, where they are often made almost automatically and instantaneously. Much attention has been paid to the way in which we choose and make decisions of all kinds and, over time, various theories have developed in this regard.
Nevertheless, some authors such as Laurie Ann Paul argue that such theories, the standard models of rational choice and decision theory, although of fundamental importance, have been developed in an overly formal and impersonal manner and, consequently, are not able to help us in making the choices that she believes bring about an essential transformation in our lives. Indeed, according to her, what is neglected by them and should instead be preserved is authenticity, which she defines as the subject’s personal vision, his or her unique and irreplaceable point of view.
The main purpose of this paper, however, is to show the significant problems that the concept of authenticity entails, since it is in fact a vague concept, full of interpretations and above all allegedly based on an even more problematic concept, namely personal identity. Consequently, after expounding some of the main features of rational choice theory and Paul’s theory, the focus of the paper will turn towards the concept of authenticity, trying to highlight its various problems when interpreted in the terms supposedly indicated by Paul.
Finally, after having shown that authenticity originates as an ethical principle and that if used as a guide in choices it may entail more problems than solutions, an alternative will be proposed, namely the concept of autonomy. This concept, in fact, seems to represent a valid option that can be adopted in order to make decisions.
Chair: M. Hadi Fazeli
Time: September 8th, 10:00-10:30
Location: SR 1.005
SOPhiA 2026 