Re: The concept of methodological individualism
alternatively, we could define methodological individualism relative to Levins Lewontin's description of the dialectical methodology: (1) they see the different heterogeneous parts as determining the character of the whole (parts make whole). (2) they also see a feed-back from the whole, which determines the character of the parts (whole makes parts). Methodological individualism involves a willful ignorance of the second moment, i.e., the way in which (say) the societal structure shapes, limits, and actually determines our consciousness, tastes, etc. (Given this partial view, All social phenomena can be explained in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states. ) btw, the interaction between (1) and (2) could (in theory) form some sort of static equilibrium, but for LL it's a dynamic process. For those who enjoy methodological individualism, I recommend Gandolfi, Gandolfi, and Barash's ECONOMICS AS AN EVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE, where Becker-style methodological individualism is married to the selfish gene. Jim -Original Message- From: andie nachgeborenen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sun 11/2/2003 7:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption There are at least two distinct senses of the term methodological individualism: (1) All social phenomena can be explained in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states (the nonreductive sense), and (2) All social phenomena can be explained _only_ in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states (the reductive sense), i.e., there are no explanatory social facts or properties. The first view is probabaly false and probaly incoherent because the mental states of individuals are social states at least in part. But it's a harmless view if it is taken to say there is also social analysis. The second view is not only false and meaningless, but pernicious, and incompatible with historical materialism. I wrote a paper on this a decade ago, Metaphysical Individualism and Functional Explanation, Phil Science (1993). jks --- Eubulides [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:31 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption Corruption is defined as the abuse of public power for private gain. snip The definition seems pretty good to me. What's methodological individualism? Joanna == It makes all politics and commerce corrupt by definition. It also ignores the problematzing of the public-private distinction. Who gets to decide what 'abuse of power' means? http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Scie/ScieFran.htm Ian __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
Re: The concept of methodological individualism
Dear Devine / what you think about - Geoffrey Hodgson - Economics and Institutions - a manifesto for a modern institutional economics? - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 1:06 PM Subject: Re: The concept of methodological individualism alternatively, we could define methodological individualism relative to Levins Lewontin's description of the dialectical methodology: (1) they see the different heterogeneous parts as determining the character of the whole (parts make whole). (2) they also see a feed-back from the whole, which determines the character of the parts (whole makes parts). Methodological individualism involves a willful ignorance of the second moment, i.e., the way in which (say) the societal structure shapes, limits, and actually determines our consciousness, tastes, etc. (Given this partial view, All social phenomena can be explained in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states. ) btw, the interaction between (1) and (2) could (in theory) form some sort of static equilibrium, but for LL it's a dynamic process. For those who enjoy methodological individualism, I recommend Gandolfi, Gandolfi, and Barash's ECONOMICS AS AN EVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE, where Becker-style methodological individualism is married to the selfish gene. Jim -Original Message- From: andie nachgeborenen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sun 11/2/2003 7:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption There are at least two distinct senses of the term methodological individualism: (1) All social phenomena can be explained in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states (the nonreductive sense), and (2) All social phenomena can be explained _only_ in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states (the reductive sense), i.e., there are no explanatory social facts or properties. The first view is probabaly false and probaly incoherent because the mental states of individuals are social states at least in part. But it's a harmless view if it is taken to say there is also social analysis. The second view is not only false and meaningless, but pernicious, and incompatible with historical materialism. I wrote a paper on this a decade ago, Metaphysical Individualism and Functional Explanation, Phil Science (1993). jks --- Eubulides [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:31 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption Corruption is defined as the abuse of public power for private gain. snip The definition seems pretty good to me. What's methodological individualism? Joanna == It makes all politics and commerce corrupt by definition. It also ignores the problematzing of the public-private distinction. Who gets to decide what 'abuse of power' means? http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Scie/ScieFran.htm Ian __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
Re: The concept of methodological individualism
alas, I haven't read it. (He did have a very useful article in the JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, vol. 36, no. 1, 1998.) I do think that institutionalist economics is important and has a lot to add. Also, I interpret Marx as being an institutionalist. However, unlike some institutionalists, he saw capitalism itself as an institution, i.e., an organization that both was created by people (though not exactly as they pleased) and creates people's ideologies, preferences, etc. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Mario Jos de Lima [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 7:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of methodological individualism Dear Devine / what you think about - Geoffrey Hodgson - Economics and Institutions - a manifesto for a modern institutional economics? - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 1:06 PM Subject: Re: The concept of methodological individualism alternatively, we could define methodological individualism relative to Levins Lewontin's description of the dialectical methodology: (1) they see the different heterogeneous parts as determining the character of the whole (parts make whole). (2) they also see a feed-back from the whole, which determines the character of the parts (whole makes parts). Methodological individualism involves a willful ignorance of the second moment, i.e., the way in which (say) the societal structure shapes, limits, and actually determines our consciousness, tastes, etc. (Given this partial view, All social phenomena can be explained in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states. ) btw, the interaction between (1) and (2) could (in theory) form some sort of static equilibrium, but for LL it's a dynamic process. For those who enjoy methodological individualism, I recommend Gandolfi, Gandolfi, and Barash's ECONOMICS AS AN EVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE, where Becker-style methodological individualism is married to the selfish gene. Jim -Original Message- From: andie nachgeborenen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sun 11/2/2003 7:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption There are at least two distinct senses of the term methodological individualism: (1) All social phenomena can be explained in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states (the nonreductive sense), and (2) All social phenomena can be explained _only_ in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states (the reductive sense), i.e., there are no explanatory social facts or properties. The first view is probabaly false and probaly incoherent because the mental states of individuals are social states at least in part. But it's a harmless view if it is taken to say there is also social analysis. The second view is not only false and meaningless, but pernicious, and incompatible with historical materialism. I wrote a paper on this a decade ago, Metaphysical Individualism and Functional Explanation, Phil Science (1993). jks --- Eubulides [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:31 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption Corruption is defined as the abuse of public power for private gain. snip The definition seems pretty good to me. What's methodological individualism? Joanna == It makes all politics and commerce corrupt by definition. It also ignores the problematzing of the public-private distinction. Who gets to decide what 'abuse of power' means? http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Scie/ScieFran.htm Ian __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
Re: The concept of methodological individualism
I agree to your points of view. An interesting aspect to be considered on the british institutionalists, in contrast of the United States source (Williamson, North, etc.), is its critical to the neoclassic thought and effort to construct a dialogue with Marx. - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 2:22 PM Subject: Re: The concept of methodological individualism alas, I haven't read it. (He did have a very useful article in the JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, vol. 36, no. 1, 1998.) I do think that institutionalist economics is important and has a lot to add. Also, I interpret Marx as being an institutionalist. However, unlike some institutionalists, he saw capitalism itself as an institution, i.e., an organization that both was created by people (though not exactly as they pleased) and creates people's ideologies, preferences, etc. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Mario Jos de Lima [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 7:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of methodological individualism Dear Devine / what you think about - Geoffrey Hodgson - Economics and Institutions - a manifesto for a modern institutional economics? - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 1:06 PM Subject: Re: The concept of methodological individualism alternatively, we could define methodological individualism relative to Levins Lewontin's description of the dialectical methodology: (1) they see the different heterogeneous parts as determining the character of the whole (parts make whole). (2) they also see a feed-back from the whole, which determines the character of the parts (whole makes parts). Methodological individualism involves a willful ignorance of the second moment, i.e., the way in which (say) the societal structure shapes, limits, and actually determines our consciousness, tastes, etc. (Given this partial view, All social phenomena can be explained in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states. ) btw, the interaction between (1) and (2) could (in theory) form some sort of static equilibrium, but for LL it's a dynamic process. For those who enjoy methodological individualism, I recommend Gandolfi, Gandolfi, and Barash's ECONOMICS AS AN EVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE, where Becker-style methodological individualism is married to the selfish gene. Jim -Original Message- From: andie nachgeborenen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sun 11/2/2003 7:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption There are at least two distinct senses of the term methodological individualism: (1) All social phenomena can be explained in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states (the nonreductive sense), and (2) All social phenomena can be explained _only_ in terms of individual persons and their states without reference to social facts or states (the reductive sense), i.e., there are no explanatory social facts or properties. The first view is probabaly false and probaly incoherent because the mental states of individuals are social states at least in part. But it's a harmless view if it is taken to say there is also social analysis. The second view is not only false and meaningless, but pernicious, and incompatible with historical materialism. I wrote a paper on this a decade ago, Metaphysical Individualism and Functional Explanation, Phil Science (1993). jks --- Eubulides [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:31 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption Corruption is defined as the abuse of public power for private gain. snip The definition seems pretty good to me. What's methodological individualism? Joanna == It makes all politics and commerce corrupt by definition. It also ignores the problematzing of the public-private distinction. Who gets to decide what 'abuse of power' means? http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Scie/ScieFran.htm Ian __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
Re: The concept of methodological individualism
The article I cited by Hodgson argues that the main distinction between the new institutionalists (North, etc.) and the old ones (Hodgson, etc.) is that North and the like take preferences, tastes, ideologies, expectations as _given_ and unexplained, whereas Hodgson and the like explain these mental states partly by reference to the institutions. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine I agree to your points of view. An interesting aspect to be considered on the british institutionalists, in contrast of the United States source (Williamson, North, etc.), is its critical to the neoclassic thought and effort to construct a dialogue with Marx. - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 2:22 PM Subject: Re: The concept of methodological individualism alas, I haven't read it. (He did have a very useful article in the JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, vol. 36, no. 1, 1998.) I do think that institutionalist economics is important and has a lot to add. Also, I interpret Marx as being an institutionalist. However, unlike some institutionalists, he saw capitalism itself as an institution, i.e., an organization that both was created by people (though not exactly as they pleased) and creates people's ideologies, preferences, etc.
Re: The concept of methodological individualism
For an in-depth critique of neoclassic (and other) streams of thought from
an institutionalist position, see Geof frey Hodgson's, "How Economics Forgot
History."
Paul Phillips,
Economics,
University of Manitoba
Mario Jos de Lima wrote:
I agree to your points of view. An interesting aspect to be considered on
the british institutionalists, in contrast of the United States source
(Williamson, North, etc.), is its critical to the neoclassic thought and
effort to construct a dialogue with Marx.
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: The concept of methodological individualism
alas, I haven't read it. (He did have a very useful article in the JOURNAL
OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, vol. 36, no. 1, 1998.) I do think that
institutionalist economics is important and has a lot to add. Also, I
interpret Marx as being an institutionalist. However, unlike some
institutionalists, he saw capitalism itself as an institution, i.e., an
organization that both was created by people (though not exactly as they
pleased) and creates people's ideologies, preferences, etc.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message-
From: Mario Jos de Lima [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 7:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of methodological individualism
Dear Devine / what you think about - Geoffrey Hodgson - Economics and
Institutions - a manifesto for a modern institutional economics?
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: The concept of methodological individualism
alternatively, we could define "methodological
individualism" relative to
Levins Lewontin's description of the dialectical methodology:
(1) they see the different heterogeneous parts as determining the
character of the whole ("parts make whole").
(2) they also see a feed-back from the whole, which determines the
character of the parts ("whole makes parts").
Methodological individualism involves a willful ignorance
of the second
"moment," i.e., the way in which (say) the societal structure shapes,
limits, and actually determines our consciousness, tastes,
etc. (Given this
partial view, "All social phenomena can be explained in terms
of individual
persons and their states without reference to social facts or
states." )
btw, the interaction between (1) and (2) could (in theory)
form some sort
of static equilibrium, but for LL it's a dynamic process.
For those who enjoy methodological individualism, I
recommend Gandolfi,
Gandolfi, and Barash's ECONOMICS AS AN EVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE, where
Becker-style methodological individualism is married to the
selfish gene.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: andie nachgeborenen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sun 11/2/2003 7:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption
There are at least two distinct senses of the term
"methodological individualism":
(1) All social phenomena can be explained in terms of
individual persons and their states without reference
to social facts or states (the nonreductive sense),
and
(2) All social phenomena can be explained _only_ in
terms of individual persons and their states without
reference to social facts or states (the reductive
sense), i.e., there are no explanatory social facts or
properties.
The first view is probabaly false and probaly
incoherent because the mental states of individuals
are social states at least in part. But it's a
harmless view if it is taken to say there is also
social analysis. The second view is not only false and
meaningless, but pernicious, and incompatible with
historical materialism.
I wrote a paper on this a decade ago, Metaphysical
Individualism and Functional Explanation, Phil Science
(1993).
jks
--- Eubulides [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "joanna bujes" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The concept of corruption
Corruption is defined as "the abuse of public
power for private gain."
snip
The definition seems pretty good to me. What
