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 comments focus on four issues. First, I argue that his naturalistic reconstruction of critical realist transcendental arguments shows that transcendental...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Petri Ylikoski
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Vienna 2015-07-01
Series:Journal of Social Ontology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journalofsocialontology.org/index.php/jso/article/view/6867
_version_ 1797818182913753088
author Petri Ylikoski
author_facet Petri Ylikoski
author_sort Petri Ylikoski
collection DOAJ
description This comment discusses Kaidesoja (2013) and raises the issue whether his analysis justifies stronger conclusions than he presents in the book. My comments 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.
first_indexed 2024-03-13T09:04:20Z
format Article
id doaj.art-04d704b927a54225833a30ff91cb1223
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2196-9663
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-13T09:04:20Z
publishDate 2015-07-01
publisher University of Vienna
record_format Article
series Journal of Social Ontology
spelling doaj.art-04d704b927a54225833a30ff91cb12232023-05-28T07:32:29ZengUniversity of ViennaJournal of Social Ontology2196-96632015-07-0112Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social OntologyPetri Ylikoski0University of Helsinki This comment discusses Kaidesoja (2013) and raises the issue whether his analysis justifies stronger conclusions than he presents in the book. My comments 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. https://journalofsocialontology.org/index.php/jso/article/view/6867critical realismtranscendental argumentscausal poweremergencesocial ontology
spellingShingle Petri Ylikoski
Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology
Journal of Social Ontology
critical realism
transcendental arguments
causal power
emergence
social ontology
title Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology
title_full Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology
title_fullStr Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology
title_full_unstemmed Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology
title_short Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology
title_sort comment on naturalizing critical realist social ontology
topic critical realism
transcendental arguments
causal power
emergence
social ontology
url https://journalofsocialontology.org/index.php/jso/article/view/6867
work_keys_str_mv AT petriylikoski commentonnaturalizingcriticalrealistsocialontology