The Incentivized Action View of Institutional Facts as an Alternative to the Searlean View
A Response to Butchard and D’Amico
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 10927635 |
|---|---|
| Autores | J P Smit (0000-0003-1524-8845, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa, autor correspondente), Filip Buekens (Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands), Du Plessis (0000-0003-2272-6905, Stellenbosch University), Stan du Plessis (University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa) |
| Ano | 2016 |
| Volume | 46 |
| Fascículo | 1 |
| Páginas | 44-55 |
| Data de publicação | 2016-01-01 |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Philosophy of the Social Sciences (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0048-3931 • E-ISSN: 1552-7441 |
| Editora | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0048393115614275 |
| OpenAlex | W2253163238 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 2 |
| Referências citadas | 8 |
In our earlier work, we argued, contra Searle, that institutional facts can be understood in terms of non-institutional facts about actions and incentives. Butchard and D’Amico claim that we have misinterpreted Searle, that our main argument against him (“the circularity objection”) has no merit and that our positive view cannot account for institutional facts created via joint action. We deny all three charges
Action (physics) · Argument (complex analysis) · Economics · Epistemology · Incentive · Institutional theory · Law and economics · Microeconomics · Positive economics · Social science · Sociology · Economic Theory and Institutions · Philosophy · Political Economy and Marxism · Political Philosophy and Ethics
| Citações por ano | 0,22 |
|---|---|
| Intervalo de citações | 2017 - 2017 (1) |
| Altamente citado | Não |