Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What’s the Alternative?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism

Abstract

In this chapter, I defend the thesis that all social phenomena—their structure and their change—are in principle explicable in ways that only involve individuals—their properties, their goals, their beliefs, and their actions. Such explanations are sometimes unfeasible for practical reasons, but it is argued that they should always define the goal of scholars. In addition to considering the views of Tocqueville, Marx, and Durkheim, the chapter addresses the views of G. A. Cohen, Pierre Bourdieu, Robert Putnam, and Kenneth Arrow.

Unless otherwise noted, all italics in quoted passages are mine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arrow, K. (1971). Political and economic evaluation of social effects and externalities. In M. Intriligator (ed.), Frontiers of Quantitative Economics (pp. 3-25). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. (1994). Methodological individualism and social knowledge. American Economic Review 84 (2). Papers and Proceedings of the hundred and sixth annual meeting of the American Economic Association, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow. K. (1999). Observations on social capital In Dasgupta, P. and Serageldin, I. (Eds.), Social Capital. Washington D.C: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. (2001). Reflections on the reflections. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 26, pp. 1197–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, M. (1964). The Historian's Craft. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1969). Intellectual field and creative project. Social Science Information 8 (2), pp. 89–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1988). The Logic of Practice. Palo Alto CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browning, M. and Chiappori, P. (1998). Efficient intra-household allocations. Econometrica 66, pp. 1241–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, G. A. (1978). Karl Marx’s Interpretation of History: A Defense. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglass, E. (1983). Rebels and Democrats. Chicago IL: Elephant Paperbacks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, É. (1915). The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, É. (1919). Les règles de la méthode sociologique. Paris: F. Alcan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (1981). Review of the French edition of Bourdieu 1984. London Review of Books 3 (20), 10–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (1985). Making Sense of Marx. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (1993). Ethical individualism and presentism. The Monist 76, pp. 333–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (2013). Securities Against Misrule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (2015). Explaining Social Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (2017). On seeing and being seen. Social Choice and Welfare 49, pp. 721–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elster. J. (2021). Enthusiasm and anger in history. Inquiry 64, pp. 249–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (2023). America Before 1787: The Unraveling of a Colonial Regime. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ermakoff, I. (2008). Ruling Oneself Out. Durham NC: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ermakoff, I. (2015). The structure of contingency. American Journal of Sociology 121, pp. 64–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, M. (2002). Collective guilt and collective guilt feelings. Journal of Ethics 6, pp. 115–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, M. (2020). Shared Intentionality, joint commitment, and directed obligation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, B. (2006). Why-explanations. Theoria 72, pp. 23–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haskel, J. and Martin, C. (1994). Capacity and competition. Journal of Industrial Economics 42, pp. 23–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haslanger, S. (2020). Failures of methodological individualism: the materiality of social systems. Journal of Social Philosophy, open access, pp. 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jankovic, M. and Ludwig, K. Eds. (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Collective Intentionality. New York NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • List, C. and Spiekermann. K. (2013). Methodological individualism and holism in political science. American Political Science Review 107, pp. 629–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovejoy, D. (1985). Religious Enthusiasm in the New World. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, G. (1996). Ending footbinding and infibulation. American Sociological Review 61, pp. 999–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. (2003). What is field theory? American Journal of Sociology 109, pp. 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. (1857). Grundrisse, cited after the translation in Penguin Books. London 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. (1867). Capital I, cited after the translation in Penguin Books. London 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. (1894). Capital III, cited after the translation in Penguin Books. London 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Megiddo, T. (2019). Methodological individualism. Harvard International Law Journal 60, pp. 219–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. (2001). Social capital: measurement and consequences. Isuma: Canadian Journal of Policy Research 2, pp. 41–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quattrone, G. and Tversky, A. (1984). Causal versus diagnostic contingencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46, pp. 237–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royster, C. (1979). A Revolutionary People at War. Chapel Hill NC: University of Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sartre, J.-P. (1943). L’être et le néant. Paris: Gallimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, J. (2002). Can we trust social capital. Journal of Economic Literature XL, pp. 139-54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. (1981). Selection by consequences. Science 213, pp. 501–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, G. (1995). Structural textualism. Boston University Law Review 75, pp. 321–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tocqueville, A. de. (2001). The Old Regime and the Revolution, volume 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tocqueville, A. de. (2010). Democracy in America (bilingual edition). Indianapolis IN: Liberty Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turgot, A.-R. (2018). Oeuvres, volume 1. Paris: Institut Coppet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolcock, M. (2001). The place of social capital in understating social and economic outcomes. Isuma: Canadian Journal of Policy Research 2, pp. 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Philosophy and Political Science, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Jon Elster

  2. Collège de France, Paris, France

    Jon Elster

Authors
  1. Jon Elster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon Elster .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. French National Center for Scientific Research, Paris, France

    Nathalie Bulle

  2. Nankai University, Tianjin, China

    Francesco Di Iorio

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Elster, J. (2023). What’s the Alternative?. In: Bulle, N., Di Iorio, F. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41512-8_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41512-8_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-41511-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-41512-8

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation