by Summary:
An earlier post offered what is for me a fairly large change of orientation on fundamental questions of social ontology: a conviction that the concept of ontological individualism is no longer supportable. My concern there was that this phrase gives too much ontological priority to individual actors; whereas the truth about the social world is more complex. Individuals are indeed the substrate of social structures and entities, but social entities are in turn constitutive of individual social actors.The implication is that our social ontology needs to give equal priority to both actors and structures. But how can we make sense of these three ideas in a non-paradoxical way:Why is this significant? MMT is a type of institutional economics, for example. Institutional arrangements are some of
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
An earlier post offered what is for me a fairly large change of orientation on fundamental questions of social ontology: a conviction that the concept of ontological individualism is no longer supportable. My concern there was that this phrase gives too much ontological priority to individual actors; whereas the truth about the social world is more complex. Individuals are indeed the substrate of social structures and entities, but social entities are in turn constitutive of individual social actors.The implication is that our social ontology needs to give equal priority to both actors and structures. But how can we make sense of these three ideas in a non-paradoxical way:Why is this significant? MMT is a type of institutional economics, for example. Institutional arrangements are some of
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Robert Vienneau writes Austrian Capital Theory And Triple-Switching In The Corn-Tractor Model
Mike Norman writes The Accursed Tariffs — NeilW
Mike Norman writes IRS has agreed to share migrants’ tax information with ICE
Mike Norman writes Trump’s “Liberation Day”: Another PR Gag, or Global Reorientation Turning Point? — Simplicius
An earlier post offered what is for me a fairly large change of orientation on fundamental questions of social ontology: a conviction that the concept of ontological individualism is no longer supportable. My concern there was that this phrase gives too much ontological priority to individual actors; whereas the truth about the social world is more complex. Individuals are indeed the substrate of social structures and entities, but social entities are in turn constitutive of individual social actors.The implication is that our social ontology needs to give equal priority to both actors and structures. But how can we make sense of these three ideas in a non-paradoxical way:
Why is this significant? MMT is a type of institutional economics, for example. Institutional arrangements are some of the structures that Daniel Little mentions as being causal factors in social science, including economics.
Understanding Society
The diachronic socialDaniel Little | Professor of Philosophy at the University of Michigan-Dearborn, Professor of Sociology and Public Policy at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and the Chancellor (emeritus) for the University of Michigan-Dearborn 2000-2018