Understanding the norm of self-interest

Peer reviewe

Harry Collins and the Crisis of Expertise

Non peer reviewe

Micro, Macro, and Mechanisms

This article, which takes a fresh look at micro–macro relations in the social sciences from the point of view of the mechanistic account of explanation, introduces the distinction between causal and constitutive explanation. It then discusses the intentional fundamentalism, and challenges the idea that intentional explanations have a privileged position in the social sciences. A mechanism-based explanation describes the causal process selectively. The properties of social networks serve both as the explananda and the explanantia in sociology. Knowledge of the causal mechanisms is vital in the justification of historical causal claims. The intentional attitudes of individuals are also important in most mechanism-based explanations of social phenomena. It is important to pay closer attention to how real macro social facts figure in social scientific theories and explanations.Peer reviewe

Review of Individuals and Identity in Economics by John B. Davis

Book review. Reviewed work: Individuals and Identity in Economics / John B. Davis. - Cambridge University Press, 2011.Non peer reviewe

Understanding the Coleman boat

Peer reviewe

Moral Gods and the Origins of Human Cooperation

Peer reviewe

Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines

Book review. Reviewed work: Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines / by Derek Beach, Rasmus Brun Pedersen. - Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2013. ISBN: 9780472051892.Non peer reviewe

The Limits of Social Science. Causal Explanation and Value Relevance by Martyn Hammersley (book review)

Non peer reviewe

Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology

This comment discusses Kaidesoja (2013) and raises the issue whether his analysis justifies stronger conclusions than he presents in the book. My com- ments focus on four issues. First, I argue that his naturalistic reconstruction of critical realist transcendental arguments shows that transcendental arguments should be treated as a rare curiosity rather than a general argumentative strategy. Second, I suggest that Kaidesoja’s analysis does not really justify his optimism about the usefulness of causal powers ontology in the social sciences. Third, I raise some doubts about the heuristic value of Mario Bunge’s social ontology that Kaidesoja presents as a replacement for critical realist ontology. Finally, I propose an alternative way to analyze failures of aggregativity that might better serve Kaidesoja’s purposes than the Wimsattian scheme he employs in the book.Non peer reviewe

Case Study Research in the Social Sciences

In this paper, we offer an introduction to case study research in the social sciences. We begin with a discussion of the definition of case study research. Next, we point to various purposes that case study research may serve in the social sciences and then turn to outline the main philosophical issues raised by case study research. Finally, we briefly present the papers in this special issue.Peer reviewe