Abstract
In opposition to the ontological neglect that characterizes so much economics a group of researchers based in Cambridge in the UK argue that method and substantive theory can benefit if informed by explicit, systematic and sustained social ontology. This paper sets out key elements of the general socio philosophical ontology that this Cambridge group outline and explores how within this approach social reality is understood as being constituted through the emergence and transformation of social totalities. A particular focus is on the importance placed by the Cambridge approach on processes of social positioning and in exploring what this involves. The paper highlights that it is this general socio philosophical ontology that provides the basis for the critique of the dominant methods of modern economics since these presuppose an implicit ontology quite inconsistent with both it and indeed any realistic conception. This implicit ontology is also shown to constrain the way economic objects are characterized within mainstream economics. Finally the paper provides an illustration of how powerful accounts of specific social existents can be developed that are consistent with the broader social ontological conception that the Cambridge group defend by sketching one account of the firm and the modern corporation recently forwarded that draws systematically upon the notion of social positioning.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
See Pratten (2013) for some reflections on how the characterization of the community by the Cambridge group compares with certain alternative perspectives.
- 2.
According to Lawson within linguistic communities norms can always be codified and where they are rules are thereby established. For further detail on his account of norms and rules, see Lawson (2016b).
- 3.
References
Deakin, S. 2017. Tony Lawson’s theory of the corporation: Towards a social ontology of law. Cambridge Journal of Economics 41 (5): 1505–1523.
Faulkner, P., and J. Runde. 2013. Technological objects, social positions and the transformational model of social activity. Management Information Systems Quarterly 37 (3): 803–818.
Faulkner, P., S. Pratten, and J. Runde. 2017. Cambridge social ontology: Clarification, development and deployment. Cambridge Journal of Economics 41 (5): 1265–1278.
Lawson, C. 2008. An ontology of technology. Techne 12 (1): 48–64.
———. 2017. Technology and Isolation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lawson, T. 1997. Economics and Reality. London: Routledge.
———. 2001. Evaluating trust, competition and cooperation: A realist perspective. In Competition, Trust and Cooperation, ed. Y. Shinoya et al. Berlin: Springer.
———. 2003. Reorienting Economics. London: Routledge.
———. 2007. Gender and social change. In The Future of Gender, ed. J. Brown. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———. 2012. Ontology and the study of social reality: Emergence, organisation, community, power, social relations, corporations, artefacts and money. Cambridge Journal of Economics 36 (2): 345–387.
———. 2014. A speeding up of the rate of social change? Technology, resistance, globalisation and the good society. In Late Modernity: Trajectories towards Morphogenic society, ed. M.S. Archer. New York: Springer.
———. 2015a. What is an institution. In Social Ontology and Modern Economics, ed. S. Pratten. London: Routledge.
———. 2015b. Essays on the Nature and State of Modern Economics. London: Routledge.
———. 2015c. The nature of the firm and the peculiarities of the corporation. Cambridge Journal of Economics 39 (1): 1–32.
———. 2015d. The modern corporation: The site of a mechanism (of global social change) that is out of control. In Social Morphogenesis: Generative mechanisms transforming late modernity, ed. M. Archer. Berlin: Springer.
———. 2016a. Social positioning and the nature of money. Cambridge Journal of Economics 40 (4): 961–996.
———. 2016b. Collective practices and norms. In Morphogenesis and Normativity, ed. M.S. Archer. New York: Springer.
———. 2016c. Comparing conceptions of social ontology: Emergent social entities and/or institutional facts? Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 46 (4): 359–399.
Pratten, S. 2013. Community, rights and the self: Comparing critical realism, George Herbert Mead and Beth Singer. Revue de Philosophie Economique 14 (1): 73–103.
———. 2015. Social Ontology and Modern Economics. London: Routledge.
———. 2016. Coase on the nature and assessment of social institutions. In The Elgar Companion to Ronald Coase, ed. C. Menard and E. Bertrand. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
———. 2017. Trust and the social positioning process. Cambridge Journal of Economics 41 (5): 1419–1436.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pratten, S. (2018). Positioning and the Nature of Social Objects. In: Róna, P., Zsolnai, L. (eds) Economic Objects and the Objects of Economics. Virtues and Economics, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94529-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94529-3_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94528-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-94529-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)