Explaining Shahnameh characters' actions on social dilemmas with emphasis on the rational choice theory

On a social dilemma, the actor faces a conflict between two options: non-cooperative (seeking immediate self interest) and cooperative (seeking collective interest or long-term self interest through collective interest). The pros and cons of each way must be evaluated to make a rational choice. This research aims at explaining the characters' actions on social dilemmas in Shahnameh based on the rational choice theory and using a descriptive-analytical method. The results show that in Shahnameh, characters have been on a social dilemma whether or not to give yes/no response to children's marriage proposal, to send or not to send hostages and to save one's life or protect the country in the battlefield. Evaluating the consequences, they chose the most advantageous option for themselves and the community. Therefore, actors' rational choice has been of the cooperative type and their choice has been an interest-oriented one. Their decision-making rule is both the rule of maximum such that the king of Yemen, Afrasiab, and Rostam determined the worst consequences of each option and then opt the best option among the worst, and the expected benefit rule such that on the dilemma of Zal and Roudabeh wedding, Sam chose the consequence with the maximum expected interest.