On the historicity of social ontology

The question I raise is whether the basic features of mind, social categories, and society are unchanging or changing. Some understandings of ontology would seem to suggest that social ontology is a branch of metaphysics. However, as the history of concepts such as metaphysical and ontology indicate, our concepts and knowledge are historical. It is widely held that society is concept- and activity-dependent. I examine critically two strands of social ontology in terms of their answers to this problematic: (1) John Searle’s theory of the construction of social reality and (2) critical realist theory of mind and society as interlaced emergent layers of reality. Apart from emergence in natural systems, there is also emergence beyond nature as consciousness, agency and society cannot be completely explained in terms of biological realities; but how and when did this emergence occur? We need an account of the emergent order of language, reflectively conscious mind, and institutions not only for its own sake, but also because the process whereby new objects and properties emerge may be on-going, path-dependent, diverse, and open-ended. The main argument is that the object of study of social theorists is geo-historically specific, liable to diversity within any given world-historical epoch, and open to further changes and new forms of emergence in the future.     

The Concept(s) of Trust in Late Modernity,the Relevance of Realist Social Theory

In this paper, we argue that trust is an important aspect of social reality, one that realist social theory has paid little attention to but which clearly resonates with a realist social ontology. Furthermore, the emergence of an interest in trust in specific subject fields such as organization theory indicates the growing significance of issues of trust as market liberalism has developed. As such, the emergence of an interest in trust provides support for Archer's characterisation of late modernity in The Reflexive Imperative (2012) as a period of heterogeneity and greater incongruity. Commenting on this provides an opportunity to discuss the issue of habit in relation to trust and also the importance of the analysis of integration as a means to explain problems of trust. The commentary draws on examples from finance.     

The Poverty of Ontological Reasoning

This article argues against ontology as an intelligible project for social theory. Ontological questions have proliferated in social thought in the past decades mainly as a way of recasting traditional sociological questions about individuals/society and structure/agency. Far from being an advance in our understanding, however, this form of reasoning has frequently brought confusion. This is demonstrated with detailed reference to a contribution from an ongoing debate, centred on the issue whether social structures are causally efficacious. I argue that the ontological project is mainly fuelled by a misconception of language and that, once this picture is exposed as incoherent, ontology loses its intelligibility.     

社会转型中的象征二元结构:以农民工群体为中心的微观权力分析

关于中国社会结构转型需要从微观和象征的角度予以理解。从“象征社会”的分析视角看,城市社会中的一系列媒介信息与象征标记往往成为社会身份的分类工具与生产机制。随着城乡社会流动的增加,农民工群体所承载的诸多象征标记使城乡界线由“城乡之间”移入“城市之中”,进而凸显出“城市中的城乡二元结构”。这种社会结构常常是文化性的、隐秘的,可用“象征二元结构”概括之。“象征二元结构”意为表达不同群体社会身份的象征系统及其运作呈现出二元对立或两极趋势,它彰显了不同群体在身份、地位、声望等方面的二分化与不平等。“象征二元结构”所包含的“问题化农村”与“梦想化城市”的逻辑成为国家建构现代性形象的手段与策略,以弥合“客观现代性”与“表达现代性”的距离。     

The Place of Construction in Sociological Realism

In the contemporary epistemological debate on social reality, characterized by the crisis of post‐modern theories and the emergence of new forms of realism, are there any approaches not acknowledging some specific ontological character to the construction of social objects? The question is apparently rhetorical, but the implication of this problem are not obvious. In the sociological literature the opposition between reality and construction is not clearly defined. Sometimes it is considered a dichotomy, in other situations the synthesis of alternative theses in a dialectical horizon. The more systematic attempt considers reality and construction as analytical macro‐dimensions where the relation between social ontology and epistemology operates. From this stance, the acknowledgement of the role of social construction in a wider realist horizon is the true overtaking of postmodern philosophy. If it is true that facts exist beyond representations, it is also true that representations themselves have a specific effect on reality, who continually re‐structures itself around specific relations of emergent power. Stating that reality is socially constructed is an evident limit of postmodern theories. On the other hand, stating that only facts exist constitute an impoverishment of realism and its replacement in neo‐positivism. Social phenomena are real because they are based on specific properties of the inter‐subjective construction of social reality. This thesis represents the revitalization of an advanced, anti‐positivistic realism and the definition of the specificity of social objects. The aim of this essay is to search for a specific place of construction within the development of realist social ontology.     

Bhaskar and Bunge on Social Emergence

This article discusses the theories of social emergence developed by Roy Bhaskar and Mario Bunge. Bhaskar's concept of emergent causal power is shown to be ambiguous, and some of the difficulties of his depth-relational concept of social emergence are examined. It is argued that Bunge's systemic concept of emergent property is not only different, but also clearer and more consistent than Bhaskar's concept of emergent causal power. Despite its clarity and consistency, Bunge's definition of the concept of emergent property is shown to be too broad and analytically imprecise for the purposes of an emergentist social ontology. It is argued that Bunge's systemic account of social emergence can be developed further by using William Wimsatt's gradual approach to emergent phenomena and his four conditions of aggregativity of a systemic property. It is shown that these conditions provide useful conceptual tools for clarifying and investigating different kinds of mechanisms of social emergence and developing stronger varieties of the concept of emergent social property than that indicated in Bunge's definition of this concept.     

Emergence and Communication in Computational Sociology

Computational sociology models social phenomena using the concepts of emergence and downward causation. However, the theoretical status of these concepts is ambiguous; they suppose too much ontology and are invoked by two opposed sociological interpretations of social reality: the individualistic and the holistic. This paper aims to clarify those concepts and argue in favour of their heuristic value for social simulation. It does so by proposing a link between the concept of emergence and Luhmann's theory of communication. For Luhmann, society emerges from the bottom‐up as communication and he describes the process by which society limits the possible selections of individuals as downward causation. It is argued that this theory is well positioned to overcome some epistemological drawbacks in computational sociology.     

Exploring the Concept of Causal Power in a Critical Realist Tradition

This article analyses and evaluates the uses of the concept of causal power in the critical realist tradition, which is based on Roy Bhaskar's philosophy of science. The concept of causal power that appears in the early works of Rom Harré and his associates is compared to Bhaskar's account of this concept and its uses in the critical realist social ontology. It is argued that the concept of emergence should be incorporated to any adequate notion of causal power. The concept of emergence used in Bhaskar and other critical realists’ works is shown to be ambiguous. It is also pointed out that the concept of causal power should be analysed in an anti‐essentialist way. Ontological and methodological problems that vitiate Bhaskar's transcendental account of the concept of causal power are examined. Moreover, it is argued that the applications of the concept of causal power to mental powers, reasons, and social structures in the critical realist social ontology are problematic. The paper shows how these problems might be avoided without giving up the concept of causal power and the notion of structural social causation.     

Organisation,Emergence and Cambridge Social Ontology

John Searle has mistakenly claimed that emergence is the central concept in the account of social ontology defended by Tony Lawson, the central figure in the project now regularly referred to as Cambridge Social Ontology. This is not the case. Rather, if any concept can be considered central for Lawson, it is organisation. In this paper, I explain how Searle could misunderstand Lawson and, in doing so, I bring out the importance of organisation for understanding how phenomena, both social and non-social, are constituted.     

赫勒与马尔库什文化现代性批判理论比较研究

赫勒与马尔库什的文化现代性批判理论都将文化概念与现代性结合在一起进行思考,都指出文化在现代社会的悖论性存在.然而,在基于文化悖论的现代性危机究竟是什么,如何对待现代性文化悖论上,赫勒与马尔库什却走向了不同的方向.马尔库什认为,现代性同一性规则消除文化悖论的企图正是现代性危机之所在,赫勒却认为,要克服现代性的危机就应该取缔文化悖论.二人对克服现代性文化危机的不同努力反映了布达佩斯学派的内部差异.     

Being other: Intersubjectivity,allocentrism and the possible

This paper engages with the issues of intersubjectivity by raising three main questions about it: What is the status of the other and of the perspective of the other? How would a social ontology that starts from the other look like? and What is the relation between intersubjectivity and the possible? In addressing these questions, I propose four main approaches to self–other relations, each one focused on a different set of theories of intersubjectivity: cognitive (being self), pragmatist (becoming other), dialogical (becoming self), and allocentric (being other). Their main premises, processes, theories and proponents, as well as implications for ethics and the emergence of novelty, are reflected on in turn. Allocentrism emerges as a useful way to shift the focus from self to other in discussions of intersubjectivity, as an ontological condition of the possible, but also as a difficult position to adopt in practice, particularly in polarized societies.     

试论残障社会模式的认识误区及其实践性陷阱

在综观近些年来障碍研究的基础上,本文聚焦于障碍社会模式的社会学批判,通过考察被矮化的社会模式,试图揭示当下对社会模式存在的几类误读,并深入分析社会模式是否存在内在局限性的问题。在此基础上,笔者指出在损伤与障碍之间通常存在二元对立的具体原因。在具体分析这些原因时,笔者从私人经验与政治的、公共领域的冲突视角出发,认为可洞察到在满足个体残障者需求、保障残障者群体的权益之间面临着一系列困境,并提出对障碍研究的实践性有必要进行再反思。     

社会的制造与集体表象

本文通过对涂尔干思想中的社会概念尤其是集体表象理论的解读,深入剖析现代社会自我证成上的困境。涂尔干一方面继承了契约论传统对社会的人为制造性的强调,另一方面又反对该传统将社会还原为个体之间约定行为的结果。集体表象理论针对的正是这一理论困境。涂尔干认为,集会或集体欢腾之际所产生的集体表象犹如化合作用,不能还原为个体的约定或契约,它是社会的产物,优先于个体。它不仅表达了个体对社会的情感,而且在定期的社会再造中创造这一情感。图腾标记对集体表象的具体化,既构成了个体认识社会的中介,又成为社会定期再造的依凭。涂尔干反对将法国大革命诠释为个体意志主导的结果,而试图通过集体表象将其诠释为社会定期再造的体现并强调社会之于个体的优先性。集体表象的神圣性既不依靠凌驾于社会之上的彼岸化的上帝,也不是个体意志的产物,而是社会性的,来自于社会的自我生产和再造。     

The macroeconomics of Italy: a regional perspective

In this contribution we show that the dualistic nature of the Italian economy has been, and still is, crucial for the design of short- and long-run macroeconomic policies, concerning unemployment, income growth and public finance.We establish the seriousness of the dualistic process of Italian regional development using several approaches. We then considered the regional nature of the Italian unemployment and show that it has profound implications for short- and long-run policies. In particular, we find that an aggregate price–unemployment relationship must be rejected. Different values of equilibrium unemployment rates for the main macro-regions of Italy are found and short-run policy implications discussed. We then consider how this heterogeneity relates to the design of growth-promoting policies.Lastly, we present evidence in favor of the importance of the missing growth of the Italian southern regions for the evolution of the Italian public finance.     

二元论到二重性：布迪厄社会观理论研究

布迪厄反对将社会看作实体性的物质结构,以为这一结构能够被感知和触摸;也反对将社会看作是种种表象和意志,呈现于主体性的感悟中。进而言之,他反对在社会与个人、物质与精神、结构与行动等二元论范式中寻求社会所在。就此而言,布迪厄的社会观,是将社会看作是实践者及其文化所型构而成的有机生命体。这一特定的社会观,建基于他对“doxa”概念的阐释。场域与习性则构成了一种具体的二重性存在。由此,布迪厄展开了其唯物主义人类学的分析。     

Badiou and the philosophy of social work: a reply to Stephen Webb

Imre R. Badiou and the philosophy of social work: a reply to Stephen Webb Int J Soc Welfare 2010: 19: 253–258 © 2010 The Author, Journal compilation © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare. Stephen Webb's recent article ‘Against diversity and difference in social work’ claims that the work of Alain Badiou has the potential to be of great use in social work practice. Webb is faced with the problem of a discourse that has eroded any practical meaning attached to notions of diversity and difference, he laments the ‘ethical turn’ in social work practice and blames post‐modernism. Webb views the work of Badiou as a way to reinvigorate social work practice. I claim that Badiou's Being and Event is exclusive to ontology. Connections between Being and Event and possible ‘uses’ of Badiou's subtractive ontology, as an instrumentalisation, are not worthwhile. Critiquing Badiou's non‐ontological philosophies and political polemics is a better way to assess the practicality of his thought outside of his ontology. Webb's conflation of post‐modernism, neoliberalism and the difference, diversity and ethics discourse is also problematic and is critiqued here.     

The Relevance of Ontological Commitments in Social Sciences: Realist and Pragmatist Viewpoints

The article discusses the relevance of ontology, the metaphysical study of being, in social sciences through a comparison of three distinct outlooks: Roy Bhaskar's version of critical realism, a pragmatic realist approach the most renowned representatives of which are Rom Harré and Hilary Putnam, and the authors' own synthesis of the pragmatist John Dewey's and the neopragmatist Richard Rorty's ideas, here called methodological relationalism. The Bhaskarian critical realism is committed to the heavy ontological furniture of metaphysical transcendentalism, resting on essentialist presumptions of causality and social structures, tacitly creating a dualism between individuals and society. Pragmatic realists, for their part, carry much lighter metaphysical baggage than critical realists and, much in a pragmatist vein, accept the idea that social scientists should study society by studying social life—the interwoven activities of individuals. Nevertheless, pragmatic realists only reluctantly, if at all, renounce the subject–object dualism and its ontological implications. Drawing on the ideas of Donald Davidson and Richard Rorty, the writers outline their own antirepresentationalist, antiessentialist approach to social sciences. The proposed methodological relationalism is a pragmatist approach of Deweyan origin. Based on a Darwinian understanding of human beings as organisms trying to cope with their environment, it emphasises the insight that one can neither step outside one's own action, nor withdraw from the actor's point of view, just as one cannot cognitively step outside language.     

The State of Welfare

Summary The word ‘welfare’ is difficult to define becauseit combines within it a range of ideologies and actions. Twoconclusions are drawn from this: first, that social servicesshould be regarded as contributors to, but not providers ofwelfare; second, that the study of social work and social administrationshould be concerned not only with the relationship of ‘service’to ‘need’ but also with societal movements and pressureswhich determine the emergence of both. The article reviews theprofessed values of the welfare state, particularly ‘socialequality’ and the problems associated with its achievement,namely public attitudes, and the discontinuity between intentionand practice in the welfare services. The implications for socialwork education and practice are considered.     

不可超越的本体论

本体论与人的本性具有内在的一致性。本体论与人的本性的相关性决定了本体论不可取消。现代哲学拒斥的是本体论的思维方式和表现形式,依然守持了本体论的承诺。马克思以感性实践对本体论思维方式的超越,既保持了哲学的形上超越之维,又切近了人的真实本性,体现出哲学的真正智慧。     

论社会公平的主观认定

近年来,收入分配不公已成为学术圈与媒体热议的话题。但收入分配结果是否公平只是基于人们伦理和价值观基础上的一种主观判断,基尼系数既不能回答社会公平的主观认定问题,也无法预言哪些群体将会影响社会的稳定。本文通过对北京居民公平感的实证研究说明20年来北京市居民的公平观发生了根本性的转变,人们对收入分配差距的承受力有所增强也有所区别。在贯彻党中央"提低,扩中,调高"的公平目标时,政府的主要工作既包括规范和整顿市场分配秩序,同时也应在调节贫富差距时防止产生新的分配不公。