In his paper 'Mindsets, rationality and emotion in multi-criteria decision analysis ', Wenstp (2005) argues that we should better take into account ethical values and emotions in our models of rationality. More specifically, he studies the extent to which ethical values and emotions can be integrated within multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). To this end, he distinguishes three perspectives over values (or 'mindsets' as he calls them): consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics and concludes that: (1) As a consequentialist model, 'the MCDA paradigm fits obviously well with consequentialism', potentially allowing that corresponding emotions are taken into account in the evaluation of consequences; (2) Deontological values could be modelled as constraints in the optimization process; (3) MCDA is 'ill fit to handle virtues'.
In this comment, I will agree with Wenstp about the importance of ethical values and emotions and will point out two key aspects of his article. Then, I will focus on these three conclusions, trying to develop why ethical values could, or could not, be integrated within the approach of MCDA. I will conclude with some comments on how to depart more radically from standard models of rationality.