Meanings of methodological individualism

Abstract

Advocacy of 'methodological individualism' is a widespread, especially among economists. However, the term is rarely defined with adequate precision and some crucial ambiguities are explored in this article. Among these is the commonplace ambivalence over whether explanations should be in terms of individuals alone, or in terms of individuals plus relations between them. It is shown that a great deal hinges on this subtle and often overlooked distinction in explanantia. In particular, explanations in terms of individuals alone have never, as yet, been achieved. Furthermore, the more feasible version of explanations in terms of individuals plus relations between them amount to the introduction of social structure alongside individuals in the explanantia. Serious questions remain whether this version warrants the one-sided emphasis on individuals in the term 'methodological individualism'.

The evolution of morality and the end of economic man

“…16 As Arrow (1994) argues forcefully, while economists often make contrary claims, all known economic analyses involve social relations or structures as well as individuals. Hodgson (2007Hodgson ( , 2013 shows that "methodological individualism" is a highly ambiguous and lamentably imprecise doctrine, and plausible versions treat social relations as well as individuals as part of the explanantia. explanation, we also have to bring in the role of structured relations between individuals (Hodgson 2007).…”

“…Hodgson (2007Hodgson ( , 2013 shows that "methodological individualism" is a highly ambiguous and lamentably imprecise doctrine, and plausible versions treat social relations as well as individuals as part of the explanantia. explanation, we also have to bring in the role of structured relations between individuals (Hodgson 2007). Morality is both a biological and a social phenomenon, and is irreducible to either individual preferences or genetic endowments.…”

Sickonomics: Diagnoses and Remedies

“…2, p. 685) Arrow's (1994) important 'rejection of methodological individualism within economics on the grounds that it cannot be realised in practice.' According to Milonakis and Fine (2009, p. 328), Hodgson (2007) 'has questioned whether a pure form of methodological individualism is to be found in practice, let alone that it is possible giving the necessity of taking something social as given in the first instance'. Yet if my argument is right, then 'something social' is never actually excluded, even from the most blinkered or formal of economic analysis.…”

“…This is such a major concession that it would imply that adequate explanations of social phenomena must always and unavoidably be in terms of both individuals and 'something social'. This would be such an impure version of methodological individualism that it would be unworthy of the name (Hodgson 2007). …”

Agreeing on generalised Darwinism: a response to Pavel Pelikan

“…Yet he defines neither term. Both terms are ambiguous and the first is particularly contentious, having several different meanings (Hodgson 2007). Which of the many versions of these terms does Pelikan advocate?…”