Forms of Explanation; Rethinking the Questions in Social Theory
Forms of Explanation; Rethinking the Questions in Social Theory
复制标题
解释形式；
DOI：
10.1080/00213624.1983.11504161
复制
发表时间：
1983
影响因子：
0.7
通讯作者：
James Webb
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
James Webb
艾伦·加芬克尔的书认为，以许多社会理论(例如，竞争市场理论；肯尼斯·阿罗、曼库尔·奥尔森和AK~en的社会选择理论；安东尼·唐斯、詹姆斯·布坎南、戈登·图洛克的政治选择理论)为前提的方法论个人主义是误导和不充分的。这篇论文是通过批判性论证--使用作者的“解释代数”--和实证例子来发展的，即基于微观还原的社会解释(即，通过简单地聚合微观层面实体的行为规则而得出的现象在宏观层面上的解释)，往往与基于宏观层面原则的解释有质的不同。作者的目标显然是务实的：他提出，在确定社会问题的解决方案方面，对社会现象的结构性(即整体性)解释优于个人主义解释。作者使用一种深入而连贯的实用哲学来追求他的目标，在这一哲学中，伦理自然主义不仅作为指导伦理原则，而且作为发展更适当的社会解释形式的不可或缺的工具发挥核心作用。事实上，他最终使用伦理自然主义作为解决僵局的手段，一方面是对结构解释无话可说的实证主义解释理论，另一方面是以PK费耶阿本德为代表的本质上反理性的极端相对主义。加芬克尔考虑了几个关于微观还原在社会理论中的作用的相互关联的问题：第一，(正如阿罗所断言的)群体行为真的可以用个人行为来完全解释吗；第二，微观还原是否回答了问题(并因此服务于相同的目的)与宏观解释；最后，价值判断在解释中发挥了什么作用。通过观察统计力学和生物学的例子，加芬克尔得出结论，一般来说，解释是独立于水平的。
Alan Garfinkel's book argues that the methodological individualism that premises many social theories (for example, competitive market theory; the social-choice theories of Kenneth Arrow, Mancur Olson, and AK~ en; the political-choice theories of Anthony Downs, James Buchanan, Gordon Tullock) is misleading and inadequate. The thesis is developed by demonstrating through critical argument-using the author's" algebra of explanation"-and empirical examples that social explanations based on microreductions (that is, explanations at the macro level of a phenomenon derived by simply aggregating the rules of behavior of the micro level entities) are often qualitatively different from explanations based on macro level principles. The author's objective is clearly pragmatic: he makes the case that structural (that is, holistic) explanations of social phenomena are superior to individualistic explanations in identifying solutions to social problems. The author pursues his objective using a thorough-going and coherent pragmatic philosophy in which ethical naturalism plays a central role not only as guiding ethical principle but also as an integral tool in developing more adequate forms of social explanation. In fact in the end he uses ethical naturalism as the means to resolve the impasse between positivist theories of explanation that have nothing to say about structural explanations, on the one hand, and the essentially anti-rational ultrarelativism exemplified by PK Feyerabend on the other. Garfinkel considers several interrelated issues on the role of micro reduction in social theory: first, is it true that (as Arrow asserts) group behavior can be fully explained in terms of individual behavior; second, do microreductions answer the questions (and thus serve the same purposes) as macroexplanations; and finally, what role do value judgments play in explanations. Looking at examples from statistical mechanics and biology Garfinkel concludes that, in general, explanation is independent of the level.