Advertisement

Science & Education

, Volume 21, Issue 10, pp 1545–1565 | Cite as

Analytical Sociology: A Bungean Appreciation

  • Poe Yu-ze Wan
Article

Abstract

Analytical sociology, an intellectual project that has garnered considerable attention across a variety of disciplines in recent years, aims to explain complex social processes by dissecting them, accentuating their most important constituent parts, and constructing appropriate models to understand the emergence of what is observed. To achieve this goal, analytical sociologists demonstrate an unequivocal focus on the mechanism-based explanation grounded in action theory. In this article I attempt a critical appreciation of analytical sociology from the perspective of Mario Bunge’s philosophical system, which I characterize as emergentist systemism. I submit that while the principles of analytical sociology and those of Bunge’s approach share a lot in common, the latter brings to the fore the ontological status and explanatory importance of supra-individual actors (as concrete systems endowed with emergent causal powers) and macro-social mechanisms (as processes unfolding in and among social systems), and therefore it does not stipulate that every causal explanation of social facts has to include explicit references to individual-level actors and mechanisms. In this sense, Bunge’s approach provides a reasonable middle course between the Scylla of sociological reification and the Charybdis of ontological individualism, and thus serves as an antidote to the untenable “strong program of microfoundations” to which some analytical sociologists are committed.

Keywords

Causal Power Ontological Status Rational Choice Theory Composite Actor Analytical Sociologist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am deeply grateful to eight anonymous reviewers for their criticisms, suggestions, and encouragements. This article is the result of a research project supported by National Science Council, Taiwan (project number 100-2628-H-110-008-MY2) and the Asia-Pacific Ocean Research Center at National Sun Yat-sen University, Taiwan (project number 00C0302703).

References

  1. Abell, P., et al. (2010). Causal and constitutive relations, and the squaring of Coleman’s diagram: Reply to Vromen. Erkenntnis, 73(3), 385–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adloff, F. (2006). Religion and social-political action: The Catholic church, Catholic charities, and the American welfare state. International Review of Sociology, 16(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexander, J. C. (1987). Action and its environments. In J. C. Alexander, et al. (Eds.), The micro-macro link (pp. 289–318). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  4. Alexander, J. C., et al. (Eds.). (1987). The micro-macro link. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. Allen, C. (2008). Housing market renewal and social class. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Archer, M. S. (1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Archer, M. S. (2000). Being human: The problem of agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Archer, M. S. (2011). Morphogenesis: Realism’s explanatory framework. In A. M. Maccarini, et al. (Eds.), Sociological realism (pp. 59–94). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Bacharach, M. (2006). In N. Gold & R. Sugden (eds.), Beyond individual choice: Teams and frames in game theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Balog, A. (2008). Makrophänomene und “Handlungstheorie”. Colemans Beitrag zur Erklärung sozialer Phänomene. In J. Greve, A. Schnabel, & R. Schützeichel (Eds.), Das Mikro-Makro-Modell der soziologischen Erklärung. Zur Ontologie, Methodologie und Metatheorie eines Forschungsprogramms (pp. 251–266). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  11. Barbalet, J. M. (1998). Emotion, social theory, and social structure: A macrosociological approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barbalet, J. M. (Ed.). (2002). Emotions and sociology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. Barbera, F. (2004). Meccanismi sociali. Elementi di sociologia analitica. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
  14. Barbera, F. (2006). A star is born? The authors, principles and objectives of analytical sociology. Papers: Revista de Sociologia, 80, 31–50.Google Scholar
  15. Bennett, A. (2008). The mother of all “isms”: Organizing political science around causal mechanisms. In R. Groff (Ed.), Revitalizing causality: Realism about causality in philosophy and social science (pp. 205–219). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Blom, B., & Morén, S. (2011). Analysis of generative mechanisms. Journal of Critical Realism, 10(1), 60–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Boudon, R. (1981). The logic of social action: An introduction to sociological analysis. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  18. Boudon, R. (1996). The “cognitivist model”: A generalized “rational-choice model”. Rationality and Society, 8(2), 123–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Boudon, R. (1997). The moral sense. International Sociology, 12(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Boudon, R. (1999). Foreword. In M. Bunge (Ed.), The sociology-philosophy connection (pp. xi–xv). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  21. Boudon, R. (2003). Beyond rational choice theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Boudon, R. (2006). Utility or rationality? Restricted or general rationality? In R. Arena & A. Festré (Eds.), Knowledge, beliefs and economics (pp. 155–178). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  23. Boudon, R. (2007). Which theory of behaviour for the social sciences? In F. Castellani & J. Quitterer (Eds.), Agency and causation in the human sciences (pp. 197–212). Paderborn: Mentis.Google Scholar
  24. Boudon, R. (2011). Ordinary rationality: The core of analytical sociology. In P. Demeulenaere (Ed.), Analytical sociology and social mechanisms (pp. 33–49). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Boudon, R., & Bourricaud, F. (1989). A critical dictionary of sociology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Brante, T. (2001). Consequences of realism for sociological theory building. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 31(2), 167–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Brym, R. J., & Hamlin, C. (2009). Suicide bombers: Beyond cultural dopes and rational fools. In M. Cherkaoui & P. Hamilton (Eds.), Raymond Boudon: A life in sociology (Vol. 2, pp. 83–96). Oxford: Bardwell Press.Google Scholar
  28. Bunge, M. (1977). Treatise on basic philosophy. Vol. 3. Ontology I: The furniture of the world. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  29. Bunge, M. (1981). Scientific materialism. Boston, USA: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Bunge, M. (1989a). Treatise on basic philosophy. Vol. 8. Ethics: The good and the right. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Bunge, M. (1989b). Game theory is not a useful tool for the political scientist. Epistemologia, 12(1), 195–212.Google Scholar
  32. Bunge, M. (1995). The poverty of rational choice theory. In I. Jarvie & N. Laor (Eds.), Critical rationalism, metaphysics and sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 149–168). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Bunge, M. (1996). Finding philosophy in social science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Bunge, M. (1998). Social science under debate: A philosophical perspective. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  35. Bunge, M. (1999). The sociology-philosophy connection. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  36. Bunge, M. (2000). Ten modes of individualism—none of which works—and their alternatives. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 30(3), 384–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Bunge, M. (2001a). Philosophy in crisis: The need for reconstruction. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  38. Bunge, M. (2001b). Rational choice theory: A critical look at its foundations. In M. Mahner (Ed.), Scientific realism: Selected essays of Mario Bunge (pp. 303–319). Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  39. Bunge, M. (2001c). Systems and emergence, rationality and imprecision, free-wheeling and evidence, science and ideology: Social science and its philosophy according to van den Berg. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 31(3), 404–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Bunge, M. (2003). Emergence and convergence: Qualitative novelty and the unity of knowledge. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  41. Bunge, M. (2006a). Chasing reality: Strife over realism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  42. Bunge, M. (2006b). A systemic perspective on crime. In P.-O. H. Wikström & R. J. Sampson (Eds.), The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms, and development (pp. 8–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Bunge, M. (2007). Review of moral sentiments and material interests. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 37(4), 543–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Bunge, M. (2009). Political philosophy: Fact, fiction and vision. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  45. Bunge, M. (2010a). Matter and mind: A philosophical inquiry. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  46. Bunge, M. (2010b). Soziale Mechanismen und mechanismische Erklärungen. Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 20, 371–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Bunge, M., & Ardila, R. (1987). Philosophy of psychology. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Chant, S. R. (2007). Unintentional collective action. Philosophical Explorations, 10(3), 245–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Cherkaoui, M. (2003). Les transitions micro-macro Limites de la théorie du choix rationnel dans les Foundations of Social Theory. Revue française de sociologie, 44(2), 231–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Coleman, J. S. (1974). Power and the structure of society. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  51. Coleman, J. S. (1982). The asymmetric society. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Colman, A. M., Pulford, B. D., & Rose, J. (2008). Team reasoning and collective rationality: Piercing the veil of obviousness. Acta Psychologica, 128(2), 409–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Creaven, S. (2000). Marxism and realism: A materialistic application of realism in the social sciences. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  55. Crossley, N. (2010). Towards relational sociology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Dahrendorf, R. (1959). Class and class conflict in industrial society. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. DeLanda, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  58. Demeulenaere, P. (2011). Introduction. In P. Demeulenaere (Ed.), Analytical sociology and social mechanisms (pp. 1–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Donati, P. (2010). Relational sociology: A new paradigm for the social sciences. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Elder-Vass, D. (2010). The causal power of social structures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Elster, J. (1999). Alchemies of the mind: Rationality and the emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Elster, J. (2007). Explaining social behavior: More nuts and bolts for the social sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Elster, J. (2009). Emotions. In P. Hedström & P. Bearman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of analytical sociology (pp. 51–71). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Emirbayer, M. (1996). Useful Durkheim. Sociological Theory, 14(2), 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Esser, H. (1993). Soziologie. Allgemeine Grundlagen. New York: Campus.Google Scholar
  66. Esser, H. (1994). Explanatory Sociology. Soziologie, special edition, 3, 177–190.Google Scholar
  67. Esser, H. (1999). Soziologie. Spezielle Grundlagen. Band 1: Situationslogik und Handeln. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
  68. Fehr, E., & Gintis, H. (2007). Human motivation and social cooperation: Experimental and analytical foundations. Annual Review of Sociology, 33(1), 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Fotopoulos, T. (2000). Systems theory and complexity: A potential tool for radical analysis or the emerging social paradigm for the internationalised market economy? Democracy and Nature, 6(3), 421–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Franks, D. D. (2010). Neurosociology: The nexus between neuroscience and social psychology. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  71. Fuchs, C. (2008). Internet and society: Social theory in the information age. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  72. Geser, H. (1990). Organisationen als soziale Akteure. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 19(6), 401–417.Google Scholar
  73. Geser, H. (1992). Towards an interaction theory of organizational actors. Organization Studies, 13(3), 429–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Gilbert, M. (2000). Sociality and responsibility: New essays in plural subject theory. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  75. Gilbert, M. (2007). Searle and collective intentions. In S. L. Tsohatzidis (Ed.), Intentional acts and institutional facts: Essays on John Searle’s social ontology (pp. 31–48). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Glennan, S. (2010). Ephemeral mechanisms and historical explanation. Erkenntnis, 72(2), 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Gold, N., & Sugden, R. (2007). Collective intentions and team agency. Journal of Philosophy, 104(3), 109–137.Google Scholar
  78. Gould, S. J. (2001). The evolutionary definition of selective agency, validation of the theory of hierarchical selection, and fallacy of the selfish gene. In R. S. Singh, et al. (Eds.), Thinking about evolution: Historical, philosophical, and political perspectives (pp. 208–234). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Greshoff, R. (2010). Brauchen wir eine neue Theorienvergleichsdebatte? Zeitschrift für Soziologie, Forum 2, 1–12.Google Scholar
  80. Greshoff, R., Huinink, J., & Schimank, U. (2011). Aggregation dynamics of multi-level actor constellations: Introductory paper. Welfare Societies working papers, no. 02/2011. Bremen: Research Network “Welfare Societies”.Google Scholar
  81. Greve, J., Schnabel, A., & Schützeichel, R. (Eds.). (2008). Das Mikro-Makro-Modell der soziologischen Erklärung. Zur Ontologie, Methodologie und Metatheorie eines Forschungsprogramms. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  82. Hakli, R., Miller, K., & Tuomela, R. (2010). Two kinds of we-reasoning. Economics and philosophy, 26(3), 291–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Hamlin, C. L. (2002). Beyond relativism: Raymond Boudon, cognitive Rationality, and critical realism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  84. Harré, R. (1981). Philosophical aspects of the macro-micro problem. In K. Knorr-Cetina & A. V. Cicourel (Eds.), Advances in social theory and methodology: Toward an integration of micro- and macro-sociologies (pp. 139–160). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  85. Harré, R. (1993). Social being (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  86. Harré, R. (1997). Crews, clubs, crowds, and classes: “The social” as a discursive category. In J. D. Greenwood (Ed.), The mark of the social: Discovery or invention? (pp. 199–212). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  87. Harré, R., & Madden, E. H. (1975). Causal powers: A theory of natural necessity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  88. Hedström, P. (2005). Dissecting the social: On the principles of analytical sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Hedström, P. (2009). The analytical turn in sociology. In P. Hedström & B. Wittrock (Eds.), Frontiers of sociology (pp. 331–342). Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Hedström, P., & Bearman, P. (2009). What is analytical sociology all about? An introductory essay. In P. Hedström & P. Bearman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of analytical sociology (pp. 3–24). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Hedström, P., & Swedberg, R. (1996). Social Mechanisms. Acta Sociologica, 39(3), 281–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Hedström, P., & Swedberg, R. (1998). Social mechanisms: An introductory essay. In P. Hedström & R. Swedberg (Eds.), Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory (pp. 1–31). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Hedström, P., & Ylikoski, P. (2010a). Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Hedström, P., & Ylikoski, P. (2010b). Analytical sociology. In I. Jarvie & J. Zamora-Bonilla (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of the philosophy of social sciences (pp. 386–398). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  95. Heintz, B. (2004). Emergenz und Reduktion: Neue Perspektiven auf das Mikro-Makro-Problem. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 56(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Hofkirchner, W. (2007). A critical social systems view of the internet. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 37(4), 471–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Hoover, K. D. (2001). Causality in macroeconomics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Jepperson, R., & Meyer, J. W. (2011). Multiple levels of analysis and the limitations of methodological individualisms. Sociological Theory, 29(1), 54–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Joas, H. (1996). The creativity of action. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  100. Joas, H. (2004). The changing role of the social sciences: An action-theoretical perspective. International Sociology, 19(3), 301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Johnson, D. P. (2008). Contemporary sociological theory: An integrated multi-level approach. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  102. Kincaid, H. (1997). Individualism and the unity of science: Essays on reduction, explanation, and the special sciences. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  103. Kincaid, H. (2002). Social sciences. In P. Machamer & M. Silberstein (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of science (pp. 290–311). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  104. King, B., Felin, T., & Whetten, D. (2010). Finding the organization in organization theory: A meta-theory of the organization as social actor. Organization Science, 21(1), 290–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Kiser, E. (1999). Comparing varieties of agency theory in economics, political science, and sociology: An illustration from state policy implementation. Sociological Theory, 17(2), 146–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Kontopoulos, K. M. (1993). The logics of social structure. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Kron, T. (2010). Zeitgenossische soziologische Theorien. Zentrale Beitrage aus Deutschland. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  108. Kron, T., & Grund, T. (2010). Einführung in die Diskussion zur Analytischen Soziologie. In T. Kron & T. Grund (Eds.), Die Analytische Soziologie in der Diskussion (pp. 7–27). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Kroneberg, C. (2008). Methodologie statt Ontologie. Das Makro-Mikro-Makro-Modell als einheitlicher Bezugsrahmen der akteurstheoretischen Soziologie. In J. Greve, A. Schnabel, & R. Schützeichel (Eds.), Das Mikro-Makro-Modell der soziologischen Erklärung. Zur Ontologie, Methodologie und Metatheorie eines Forschungsprogramms (pp. 357–371). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  110. Kroneberg, C. (2011). Die Erklärung sozialen Handelns. Grundlagen und Anwendungen einer integrativen Theorie. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  111. Kuorikoski, J. (2009). Two concepts of mechanism: Componential causal system and abstract form of interaction. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 23(2), 143–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Kurki, M. (2008). Causation in international relations: Reclaiming causal analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Langlois, R. N. (1983). Systems theory, knowledge, and the social sciences. In F. Machlup & U. Mansfield (Eds.), The study of information: Interdisciplinary messages (pp. 581–600). New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  114. Lichbach, M., & de Vries, H. G. E. (2007). Contentious politics and social movements. In C. Boix & S. C. Stokes (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of comparative politics (pp. 461–496). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  115. List, C., & Pettit, P. (2011). Group agency: The possibility, design, and status of corporate agents. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  116. Little, D. (1998). Microfoundations, method, and causation: On the philosophy of the social sciences. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  117. Little, D. (2010). Action in history and social science. In T. O’Connor & C. Sandis (Eds.), A companion to the philosophy of action (pp. 401–409). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems (J. Bednarz, Jr., & D. Baecker, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  119. Maccarini, A. M. (2011). Towards a new European sociology. In A. M. Maccarini, et al. (Eds.), Sociological realism (pp. 95–121). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  120. Machamer, P., Darden, L., & Craver, C. F. (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Mahner, M., & Bunge, M. (1997). Foundations of biophilosophy. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  122. Mantzavinos, C. (2009). A note on methodological individualism. In M. Cherkaoui & P. Hamilton (Eds.), Raymond Boudon: A life in sociology (Vol. 1, pp. 211–215). Oxford: Bardwell Press.Google Scholar
  123. Manzo, G. (2007). Variables, mechanisms, and simulations: Can the three methods be synthesized? Revue française de sociologie, 48(supplement), 35–71.Google Scholar
  124. Manzo, G. (2010). Analytical sociology and its critics. European Journal of Sociology, 51(1), 129–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Marchionni, C. (2008). Explanatory pluralism and complementarity: From autonomy to integration. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 38(3), 314–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Marsden, P. V. (2006). Coleman, James S. In J. Beckert & M. Zafirovski (Eds.), International encyclopedia of economic sociology (pp. 69–71). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  127. Martin, J. L. (2009). Social structures. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  128. Martin, P. J., & Dennis, A. (Eds.). (2010). Human agents and social structures. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  129. Maurer, A., & Schmid, M. (2008). Mechanismen in der erklärenden Soziologie. Zur Logik und Forschungspraxis mechanismischer Erklärungen am Beispiel des Machtmechanismus. In K.-S. Rehberg (Ed.), Verhandlungen des 33. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in Kassel 2006 (pp. 2881–2895). Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
  130. Mayntz, R., & Scharpf, F. W. (1995). Der Ansatz des akteurzentrierten Institutionalismus. In R. Mayntz & F. W. Scharpf (Eds.), Gesellschaftliche Selbstregelung und politische Steuerung (pp. 39–72). Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
  131. Moessinger, P. (2008). Voir la société: Le micro et le macro. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
  132. Mommsen, W. (1965). Max Weber’s political sociology and his philosophy of world history. International Social Science Journal, 17(1), 23–45.Google Scholar
  133. Mouzelis, N. (2008). Modern and postmodern social theorizing: Bridging the divide. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Noguera, J. A. (2006). Introduction: Why we need an analytical sociological theory. Papers: Revista de Sociologia, 80, 7–28.Google Scholar
  135. Noguera, J. A., et al. (2009). Por un giro analítico en sociología. Revista Internacional de Sociología, 67(2), 435–456.Google Scholar
  136. O’Donnell, M. (Ed.). (2010). Structure and agency (Vol. 1–3). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  137. Oldenburg, L. (2007). Bunge vs. Esser- Eine Analyse von Kritik an der Rational-Choice-Theorie. Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag.Google Scholar
  138. Ostrom, E. (2007). Collective action theory. In C. Boix & S. C. Stokes (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of comparative politics (pp. 186–208). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  139. Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100(3), 641–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Panebianco, A. (2009). L’automa e lo spirito. Azioni individuali, istituzioni, imprese collettive. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
  141. Pettit, P. (2009). The reality of group agents. In C. Mantzavinos (Ed.), Philosophy of the social sciences: Philosophical theory and scientific practice (pp. 67–91). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Pettit, P., & Schweikard, D. (2006). Joint actions and groups agents. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 36(1), 18–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Pickel, A. (2005). The habitus process: A biopsychosocial conception. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 35(4), 437–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Pickel, A. (2006). The problem of order in the global age: Systems and mechanisms. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Poteete, A. R., Janssen, M. A., & Ostrom, E. (2010). Working together: Collective action, the commons, and multiple methods in practice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  146. Powell, W. W., & Colyvas, J. (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 276–298). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  147. Pozzi, D. R. (2007). System’s effects: Some comments on methodological individualism. L’Année sociologique, 57(1), 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Reddy, W. M. (2009). Saying something new: Practice theory and cognitive neuroscience. Arcadia: International Journal for Literary Studies, 44(1), 8–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Rustagi, D., Engel, S., & Kosfeld, M. (2010). Conditional cooperation and costly monitoring explain success in forest commons management. Science, 330, 961–965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Saaristo, A. (2006). There is no escape from philosophy: Collective intentionality and empirical social science. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 36(1), 40–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Sawyer, R. K. (2004). The mechanisms of emergence. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34(2), 260–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Sayer, A. (2005). The moral significance of class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Sayer, A. (2010). Method in social science: A realist approach (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  154. Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  155. Schimank, U. (2004). Der akteurzentrierte Institutionalismus. In M. Gabriel (Ed.), Paradigmen der akteurszentrierten Soziologie (pp. 289–301). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  156. Schwinn, T. (1998). False connections: Systems and action theories in neofunctionalism and in Jürgen Habermas. Sociological Theory, 16(1), 75–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Schwinn, T. (2008). Individual and collective agency. In W. Outhwaite & S. P. Turner (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social science methodology (pp. 302–315). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  158. Selznick, P. (1992). The moral commonwealth: Social theory and the promise of community. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  159. Selznick, P. (1996). Institutionalism old and new. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), 270–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Sheehy, P. (2006). The reality of social groups. Aldershot, England: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  161. Sibeon, R. (2004). Rethinking social theory. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  162. Steel, D. (2005). Mechanisms and functional hypotheses in social science. Philosophy of Science, 72(5), 941–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Stichweh, R. (2000). Systems theory as an alternative to action theory? The rise of “communication” as a theoretical option. Acta Sociologica, 43(1), 5–14.Google Scholar
  164. Sugden, R. (2003). The logic of team reasoning. Philosophical explorations, 6(3), 165–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Tollefsen, D. P. (2002). Collective intentionality and the social sciences. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 32(1), 25–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Tuomela, R. (2007a). The philosophy of sociality: The shared point of view. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  167. Tuomela, R. (2007b). On the ontological nature of social groups. In S. Pihlström, et al. (Eds.), Approaching truth: Essays in honour of Ilkka (pp. 381–398). London: College Publications.Google Scholar
  168. Turner, S. P. (2007). Social theory as a cognitive neuroscience. European Journal of Social Theory, 10(3), 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Udehn, L. (2001). Methodological individualism: Background, history, and meaning. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  170. Udehn, L. (2003). The methodology of rational choice. In S. P. Turner & P. A. Roth (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of the social sciences (pp. 143–165). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  171. Udehn, L. (2011). The ontology of the objects of historiography. In A. Tucker (Ed.), A companion to the philosophy of history and historiography (pp. 209–219). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  172. Vaughan, D. (2009). Analytic Ethnography. In P. Hedström & P. Bearman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of analytical sociology (pp. 688–711). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  173. Vollan, B., & Ostrom, E. (2010). Cooperation and the commons. Science, 330, 923–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Wan, P. Y.-z. (2011). Reframing the social: Emergentist systemism and social theory. Aldershot, England: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  175. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. In G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds.). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  176. Wight, C. (2004). Theorizing the mechanisms of conceptual and semiotic space. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34(2), 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. Wikström, P.-O. H. (2008). In search of causes and explanations of crime. In R. D. King & E. Wincup (Eds.), Doing research on crime and justice (2nd ed., pp. 117–140). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  178. Wright, E. O., Levine, A., & Sober, E. (1992). Reconstructing Marxism: Essays on explanation and the theory of history. London: Verso.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyNational Sun Yat-sen UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan

Personalised recommendations