Status functions and institutional facts
Reply to Hindriks and Guala
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7105346 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John R Searle (University of California, Berkeley, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2015 |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 507-514 |
| Publication date | 2015-01-30 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Institutional Economics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1744-1374 • E-ISSN: 1744-1382 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s1744137414000629 |
| OpenAlex | W2142240229 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 10 |
| References cited | 6 |
Hindriks and Guala (2014) hope to provide a unified account of institutional theory that will combine the accounts of regulative rules, constitutive rules, and equilibria. I argue that only the constitutive rule approach has any possibility of success, and that the other two cannot even pose the right questions, much less answer them. Hindriks and Guala think constitutive rules can be reduced to regulative rules. I argue that their reduction is mistaken. The key to understanding social ontology is understanding status functions
Computer security · Epistemology · Key (lock · Ontology · Social ontology · Sociology · Computer Science · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Economic Theory and Institutions · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
Institutions
How to Understand Rule-Constituted Kinds
How Social Objects (Fail to) Function
Whose mind? Two interpretations of what it is to directly perceive other minds
Leave inference alone
Money and mental contents
Rights and obligations in Cambridge social ontology
Three Conceptions of a Theory of Institutions
Understanding institutions
Language and Society
| Citations per year | 0.91 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2015 - 2025 (11) |
| Highly cited | No |