scholarly journals The Epistemology of Group Duties: What We Know and What We Ought to do

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-100
Author(s):  
Anne Schwenkenbecher
Keyword(s):  
Social Ontology ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
Unified Theory

AbstractIn Group Duties, Stephanie Collins proposes a ‘tripartite’ social ontology of groups as obligation-bearers. Producing a unified theory of group obligations that reflects our messy social reality is challenging and this ‘three-sizes-fit-all’ approach promises clarity but does not always keep that promise. I suggest considering the epistemic level as primary in determining collective obligations, allowing for more fluidity than the proposed tripartite ontology of collectives, coalitions and combinations.

Constructivist Moral Realism

1998 ◽  
pp. 147-153
Author(s):  
J. K. Swindler
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
Moral Realism ◽  
Social Ontology ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Social World ◽  
Moral Law ◽  
Social Morality ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Realm

We are social animals in the sense that we spontaneously invent and continuously re-invent the social realm. But, not unlike other artifacts, once real, social relations, practices, institutions, etc., obey prior laws, some of which are moral laws. Hence, with regard to social reality, we ought to be ontological constructivists and moral realists. This is the view sketched here, taking as points of departure Searle's recent work on social ontology and May's on group morality. Moral and social selves are distinguished to acknowledge that social reality is constructed but social morality is not. It is shown how and why moral law requiring respect for the dignity and well being of agents governs a social world comprising roles that are real only because of their occupants' social intentions.

Days of post-pandemic future: re-imagining corruption practices in a world that won’t stop changing

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hendi Yogi Prabowo
Keyword(s):  
Practice Theory ◽  
Social Ontology ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Social Practices ◽  
Multiple Perspectives ◽  
Content Type ◽  
International Agencies ◽  
The Social

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to propose a new analytical framework in examining corruption from the social ontology perspective by using the Schatzkian practice theory to assess the interconnectedness among social practices constituting the social reality. Design/methodology/approach This exploratory paper is part of the author’s study to assess the complex corruption phenomenon in Indonesia from multiple perspectives to gain a better understanding of its nature and dynamics. By drawing from the existing literature on the Schatzkian practice theory, the COVID-19 pandemic and the corruption phenomenon, this study investigates the potential changes of the new constellation of practice-arrangement bundles within the social reality and how such changes may alter corruption practices in the future. Furthermore, this study also uses publicly available reports from several national and international agencies to explore possible future scenarios from the interconnectedness of corruption, anti-corruption and pandemic practices. This paper constructs a new analytical framework for assessing the corruption phenomenon and designing the most appropriate anti-corruption strategy from such an exploration. The framework also serves as a reference for future anti-corruption research. Findings The author establishes that all social phenomena are constructed by an interconnected, dynamic and ever-changing constellation of practice-arrangement bundles within the social reality. As a largely social phenomenon (at least in Indonesia), corruption is also constructed by webs of practice-arrangement bundles. For decades, corruption practices in Indonesia have always been interconnected with anti-corruption practices in ways that changes in one group of practices will drive changes in the others. With the adoption of the pandemic practices centered around social distancing, social restriction and social safety net, corruption practices appear to transform to adapt to the new environment. Therefore, future anti-corruption research should aim to examine the structure and dynamics of corruption, anti-corruption and pandemic practices to highlight changes or potential changes within the three groups of practices to determine the most appropriate intervention measures and anti-corruption strategy. Research limitations/implications This exploratory study is self-funded and relies primarily on documentary analysis to explore the corruption phenomenon in Indonesia. Future studies will benefit from in-depth interviews with former corruption offenders and corruption investigators. Practical implications This exploratory paper contributes to developing a sound corruption prevention strategy by proposing a new analytical framework for assessing various social practices, particularly those associated with corruption and the COVID-19 pandemic. Originality/value This paper highlights the importance of understanding the structure, interconnectedness and dynamics of social practices, particularly associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, to better understand the corruption phenomenon.

scholarly journals Three Conceptions of a Theory of Institutions

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 550-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
N.Emrah Aydinonat ◽  
Petri Ylikoski
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Game Theory ◽  
Natural Kinds ◽  
Social Ontology ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Social Institution ◽  
Unified Theory ◽  
Social Kinds

We compare Guala’s unified theory of institutions with that of Searle and Greif. We show that unification can be many things and it may be associated with diverse explanatory goals. We also highlight some of the important shortcomings of Guala’s account: it does not capture all social institutions, its ability to bridge social ontology and game theory is based on a problematic interpretation of the type-token distinction, and its ability to make social ontology useful for social sciences is hindered by Guala’s interpretation of social institution types as social kinds akin to natural kinds.

scholarly journals Constitutive justice and human rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 478-492
Author(s):  
Rastko Jovanov ◽  
Marija Velinov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Ontology ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
Legal Positivism ◽  
Ontological Status ◽  
Methodical Approach ◽  
Descriptive Theories ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Ontological Position

In order to show the validity of here proposed conception of social ontology and its advantages over descriptive theories of social reality, which in the analysis of the socio-ontological status of human rights find only legally understood normativity as present in social reality, we will first (1) lay out Searle?s interpretation of human rights. In the second step, we will (2) introduce the methodical approach and basic concepts of our socio-ontological position, and explain the structure of the relationship between justice, law, morality, social institutions and collective intentionality. At the end (3) we will show how our theory of social ontology is better than Searle?s legal positivism in examining the ontological status of human rights. At the end, (3) we show in what ways such a theory of social ontology more intuitively and with wider arguments explains the ontological status of institution of human rights than Searle?s legal positivism.

scholarly journals On the Difference of the Approaches of Searle and Durkheim to the Description of Social Reality

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-198
Author(s):  
A. A. Sanzhenakov
Keyword(s):  
Social Theory ◽  
Social Ontology ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
Emile Durkheim ◽  
John Searle ◽  
Common Features ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Understanding Of Science ◽  
The Individual

The article is devoted to the comparison of the social ontology of John Searle with the social theory of Emile Durkheim. It was shown that the approaches of Searle and Durkheim have a number of similar features. These common features are the rejection of reductionism of the collective to the individual, attention to language as one of the most important conditions of the emergence of social reality, the recognition of unawareness and automatism in accepting the rules of social interaction by its participants. However, there are certainly differences between the conceptions of Searle and Durkheim, and therefore the possibility of influence of analytic philosophy represented by Searle on social theory is obvious. As the basis from which this discrepancy arises, the author points to the understanding of science and the level of objectivity of scientific research that have changed since by the time of Searle.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document