David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Phenomenology and Mind 3:65-81 (2012)
Within much contemporary social ontology there is a particular methodology at work. This methodology takes as a starting point two or more asocial or atomic individuals. These individuals are taken to be perfectly functional agents, though outside of all social relations. Following this, combinations of these individuals are considered, to deduce what constitutes a social group. Here I will argue that theories which rely on this methodology are always circular, so long as they purport to describe the formation of all social groups, as they must always presuppose a pre-existing collectivity. Such methodology also produces various distortions in our theories, such as voluntarism. I focus on the workings of Plural Subject Theory as laid out by Margaret Gilbert in On Social Facts. I show that the formation of a plural subject always requires communication, and that communication always requires a pre-existing collectivity. i examine the elements within Plural Subject Theory which protect gilbert from these accusations of circularity, and argue against them. I finalise by suggesting that what Plural Subject Theory, and social ontology in general, requires as a theoretical starting point is not atomic individuals and their combinations, but rather combinations of already socialised or embedded individuals
|Keywords||Atomism Plural Subject Theory Voluntarism Social Ontology Group Formation|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Boudewijn de Bruin (2009). We and the Plural Subject. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 39 (2):235-259.
Joseph Kisolo-Ssonko (2012). Love, Plural Subjects & Normative Constraint. Phenomenology and Mind (3).
Margaret Gilbert (2006). A Theory of Political Obligation: Membership, Commitment, and the Bonds of Society. OUP Oxford.
Margaret P. Gilbert (1990). Walking Together: A Paradigmatic Social Phenomenon. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 15 (1):1-14.
Margaret Gilbert (1997). Group Wrongs and Guilt Feelings. Journal of Ethics 1 (1):65-84.
Margaret Gilbert (1999). Reconsidering the “Actual Contract” Theory of Political Obligation. Ethics 109 (2):236-260.
Paul Sheehy (2002). On Plural Subject Theory. Journal of Social Philosophy 33 (3):377–394.
Alban Bouvier (2004). Individual Beliefs and Collective Beliefs in Sciences and Philosophy: The Plural Subject and the Polyphonic Subject Accounts: Case Studies. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 34 (3):382-407.
Adrian Brasoveanu (2008). Donkey Pluralities: Plural Information States Versus Non-Atomic Individuals. [REVIEW] Linguistics and Philosophy 31 (2):129 - 209.
Bennett W. Helm (2008). Plural Agents. Noûs 42 (1):17–49.
David Schmidtz (2001). Sociality and Responsibility: New Essays in Plural Subject Theory. Margaret Gilbert. Mind 110 (439):756-759.
Dieter Wunderlich (1999). German Noun Plural Reconsidered. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (6):1044-1045.
Henry Laycock (2006). Variables, Generality and Existence. In Paulo Valore (ed.), Topics on General and Formal Ontology. Polimetrica 27.
Jean-Luc Nancy (2000). Being Singular Plural. Stanford University Press.
Added to index2012-12-12
Total downloads669 ( #1,034 of 1,907,694 )
Recent downloads (6 months)155 ( #984 of 1,907,694 )
How can I increase my downloads?