According to the so-called difference thesis, unlike natural kinds, some social kinds depend ontologically on our attitudes toward them. The difference thesis puts realism into question. It implies that these kinds can only be invented, not discovered, and that we cannot be wrong about them. In this chapter, I will challenge the difference thesis, arguing that dependence on collective propositional attitudes directed toward the kind itself is neither necessary nor sufficient for an institutional kind to exist. I will argue that it is unnecessary and insufficient even for the core cases – like money – that are usually cited in support of the thesis. If I am right, then realism holds across the board. Institutional kinds are not radically different from natural kinds: their properties ought to be discovered, and people can be massively wrong about them. Folk concepts and institutional kinds may diverge considerably, and social science is the best source of knowledge we have concerning the structure of social reality.

On the Nature of Social Kinds / F. Guala - In: Perspectives on Social Ontology and Social Cognition / [a cura di] M. Gallotti, J. Michael. - [s.l] : Springer, 2014. - ISBN 978-94-017-9146-5. - pp. 57-68 [10.1007/978-94-017-9147-2_5]

On the Nature of Social Kinds

F. Guala
Primo
2014

Abstract

According to the so-called difference thesis, unlike natural kinds, some social kinds depend ontologically on our attitudes toward them. The difference thesis puts realism into question. It implies that these kinds can only be invented, not discovered, and that we cannot be wrong about them. In this chapter, I will challenge the difference thesis, arguing that dependence on collective propositional attitudes directed toward the kind itself is neither necessary nor sufficient for an institutional kind to exist. I will argue that it is unnecessary and insufficient even for the core cases – like money – that are usually cited in support of the thesis. If I am right, then realism holds across the board. Institutional kinds are not radically different from natural kinds: their properties ought to be discovered, and people can be massively wrong about them. Folk concepts and institutional kinds may diverge considerably, and social science is the best source of knowledge we have concerning the structure of social reality.
Ontology; social kinds; money
Settore M-FIL/02 - Logica e Filosofia della Scienza
Settore M-FIL/01 - Filosofia Teoretica
2014
Book Part (author)
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/239937
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 15
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact