Abstract
In this chapter, typical examples of methodological individualism explanation are borrowed from Raymond Boudon’s writings. They respectively aim at answering the following questions:
-
Why did Athens’ allies defect in the Peloponnesian War?
-
When does social organization aim at eliminating unintended effects?
-
Why does the rule of unanimity often prevail in traditional village societies?
-
Why do members of an unorganized group tend to defect?
-
Why are collective powers often governed by the iron law of oligarchy?
-
Why did capitalist agriculture develop much more slowly in France than in England in the eighteenth century?
-
Why has the immoral character of interest lending disappeared in modern societies?
-
Why is there no socialism in the United States?
-
Why do economic booms seem to be associated with higher suicide rates?
-
Why does the diffusion of an innovation follow a chain reaction process in situations where interpersonal influence is greater?
-
Why were Mithra cult and Freemasonry, respectively, successful in Ancient Rome and modern Prussia?
-
Why were the peasants in ancient Rome hostile to monotheism?
-
Why did the French intellectuals of the late eighteenth century worship Reason?
-
Why did Indian peasants not adopt the birth control measures advocated by the Indian administration?
-
Why do conflicts between employees in a Taylorized firm tend to be more violent?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Translator’s note: The questions here refer to those discussed in the following and not to those of Boudon (1979). The titles have been adapted.
- 2.
See Stark (1962), Part Two.
- 3.
- 4.
Translator’s note: The figures indicate the preference-order. Those before the comma relate to the first actor, those after the comma relate to the second actor.
- 5.
Translator’s note: As Boudon (1979, pp. 66–67) explains, the perverseness of this structure stems from the fact that CC (the situation where the two actors would choose the cooperation strategy) is not ranked first by either of the two actors. Thus, each could be tempted to choose D (defection), while hoping that the other would choose C (cooperation). The structure thus encourages the two actors to use strategy (defection). But, if they both do, they would both obtain an unsatisfactory result since the result (DD) is only ranked third in their system of preferences. It should be noted as well that the worst situation for each of the actors is where one of them is cooperation while the other is defection. As a result, it will be to each one's advantage to choose the strategy of defection in a case where one has reason to fear that the other might be defective himself.
- 6.
Translator’s note: in opposition to an explanation of a causal nature.
- 7.
Moreover, the form of the consultation is usually beyond the control of the constituents. In general, particular conditions must be met for a general consultation to be effectively used by the constituents to correct the line followed by the oligarchy.
- 8.
On the decisive role of interpersonal influence in the credibility attached by the actor to impersonal messages, see the classic study by Katz and Lazarsfeld (1955).
- 9.
- 10.
Translator’s note: This birth control experiment carried out during 1956–1960 by Harvard School of Public Health, with funds of the Rockefeller Foundation and the Indian government, in a group of villages in the Penjab. The follow-up study was conducted in 1969 (Berger, 1974, p. 205).
- 11.
Translator’s note: Here is Berger’s conclusion about this experiment: “If the staff of the project had listened to the villagers, instead of having an anthropologist study their alleged superstitions, they would have had no difficulty understanding this. […] Humanism, from the Renaissance on, has meant a respect for the place of values and meanings in the affairs of men. The humanities have been the disciplines that have studied human events from within, as it were- from within the subjective perceptions of reality that animate actors on the historical scene and that make their actions intelligible to an outside observer. Humanism in this sense has been widely dismissed as unscientific in the ambience of the social sciences, particularly in Anglo-Saxon countries. The discussion of this chapter indicates that this dismissal may have unfortunate consequences. A humanistic approach to development policy (and just as much to the other areas of politically controlled social change) will be based on the insight that no social process can succeed unless it is illuminated with meaning from within”.
References
Berger, P. (1974). Pyramids of sacrifice: Political ethics and social change. Basic Books.
Boudon, R. (1973). L'inégalité des chances. Armand Colin [Transl. 1974. Education, Opportunity and Social Inequality. Wiley]
Boudon, R. (1977). Effets pervers et ordre social. PUF. [Transl. 1982. The Unintended Consequences of Social Action. Macmillan.ç]
Boudon, R. (1979). La logique du social. Hachette. [Transl. 1981. The logic of social action. An introduction to sociological analysis. Routledge & Kegan].
Boudon, R. (1984a). La place du désordre : Critique des théories du changement social. PUF [Transl. 1991. Theories of social change: A critical appraisal. Polity Press].
Boudon, R. (1984b). L’individualisme méthodologique en sociologie. Commentaire, 26(2), 268–277.
Boudon, R. (1989). Subjective rationality and the explanation of social behavior [Report]. Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies. https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mpifgd/896.html
Boudon, R. (Ed.) (1992). Traité de sociologie. [Treatise of Sociology]. PUF.
Boudon R. (1995). Le juste et le vrai: études sur l’objectivité des valeurs et de la connaissance. Fayard. [Transl. 2001. The origin of values. Transaction].
Boudon, R. (1998). Etudes sur les sociologies classiques. [Studies on classical sociologists]. PUF.
Boudon, R. (1999a). Le sens des valeurs. [The Meaning of Values]. PUF.
Boudon, R. (1999b). Les principaux enseignements des sciences sociales au sujet de la persuasion de masse. [Key social science lessons about mass persuasion] European Journal of Social Sciences, 37(114), 83–96.
Boudon, R. (2006). Quelle théorie du comportement pour les sciences sociales ? [What theory of behavior for the social sciences?] Open Edition.
Boudon, R. (2010). La sociologie comme science. [Sociology as a Science]. La Découverte.
Boudon, R. (2013). Le Rouet de Montaigne. [Montaigne's Spinning Wheel]. Hermann
Braudel, F. (1962). Histoire et sociologie [History and sociology]. In Georges Gurvitch (Ed.), Traité de sociologie [Sociology treatise] (pp. 83–98). Presses Universitaires de France.
Buchanan, J., & Tullock, G. (1965). The calculus of consent. The University of Michigan Press.
Coleman, J., Katz, E., & Menzel, H. (1957). The diffusion of an innovation among physicians. Sociometry, 20(4), 253–270.
Crozier, M. (1963). Le phénomène bureaucratique. Le Seuil. [Transl. 2010. The Bureaucratic Phenomenon (with a new introduction by Erhard Friedberg) Transactions Publishers].
Durkheim, E. (1893/1997). The division of labour in society. The Free Press.
Durkheim, E. (1897/1962). Suicide, a study in sociology. The Free Press.
Elias, N. (1977). Zur Grundlegung einer theorie sozialer prozesse. [On the foundation of a theory of social processes]. Zeitschrift für Sociologie, 6, 127–49.
Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice and loyalty. Responses to decline in firms, organizations and states. Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, A. O. (1980). The changing tolerance for income inequality in the course of economic development. In A. Hirschman (Ed.), Essays in trespassing (pp. 39–58). Cambridge University Press.
Hirschman, A. O. (1982). Shifting involvements. Private interest and public action. Princeton University Press.
Inkeles, A. (1959). Personality and social structure. In Robert Merton et al. (Eds.), Sociology today (pp. 249–276). Basic Books.
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. (1955). Personal influence. The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. The Free Press.
Lipset, S. M. (1983). Radicalism or reformism: The sources of working-class politics. The American Political Science Review, 77(1), 1–18.
Merton, M. (1949/1968). Social theory and social structure. The Free Press.
Mills, C. W. (1956). White collar. The American middle class. Oxford University Press.
Mannheim, K. (1929/1936). Ideology and utopia. Routledge.
Michels, R. (1959). Political parties. Dover.
Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Harvard University Press.
Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. The Free Press.
Popkin, S. (1979). The rational peasant. The political economy of rural society in Vietnam. University of California Press.
Riesman, D., Glazer, N., & Denney, R. (1950). The lonely crowd—A study of the changing American character. Yale University Press.
Sombart, W. (1906/1976). Why is there no socialism in the United States? Macmillan.
Stark, W. (1962). The fundamental forms of social thought. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Tocqueville, A. de. (1856/1952). L’Ancien Régime et la Révolution. Gallimard. [Transl. 1998. The Old Regime and the Revolution. Chigago: University of Chicago Press].
Weber, M. (1920/1993). Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Religionssoziologie. Mohr. [Transl. 1993. Sociology of Religion. Beacon Press].
Weber, M. (1922/1968). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. University of California Press.
Whyte, W. (1943). Street corner society. University of Chicago Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Boudon, R. (2023). Examples of Sociological Explanation in Terms of Methodological Individualism. In: Bulle, N., Di Iorio, F. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41508-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41508-1_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-41507-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-41508-1
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)