IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpmh/0509001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rational Choice, Scientific Method and Social Scientism

Author

Listed:
  • Bongo Adi

    (Regional Economic Development, University of Tsukuba, Japan)

  • Kenneth Amaeshi

    (Warwick Business School, Coventry, UK)

  • Suminori Tokunaga

    (Regional Economic Development, University of Tsukuba, Japan)

Abstract

The eighteenth-century introduction of the scientific method of the natural sciences to the study of social phenomena draws a line between moral philosophy - that aspect of ancient and medieval philosophy that dealt with social issues - and the social sciences as known today. From the onset, the emerging social science, or rather, its epistemological orientation to 'social scientism', was vigorously challenged by many critics who saw it as a reductionist and mechanistic understanding of human beings and their society. In recent times, this criticism has narrowed down to the critique of the rationalist assumptions or rational choice theory on which much of social scientism is built. Critics of the natural science ideal in the social sciences argue that the subject matter of the social sciences - human beings, their society and interactions - is so complex and different a system that subjecting it to the crucible of the scientific method of the natural, positivist sciences not only limits its understanding but leaves it with an abrasive and distorting impact. In the same manner, critiques of rational choice theory argue that it is a reductionism that does not account for a significant proportion of human actions and motives. What seems to be advocated for is a sort of social science method that addresses the shortcomings of the scientific method applied to social phenomena and employs a more robust model of human action that supersedes the rational choice model. This paper however posits that rationalist assumptions or rational choice theory is not peculiar to social scientism but lies at the foundation of modern and contemporary science and its method. We trace out the centrality of individual rationality assumptions in the general epistemology of the scientific method and social scienticism within the context of the centuries-old debate on the limitations of the scientific method in the social sciences. Our thesis hints at the impossibility of a modern and contemporary scientific model of either nature (physics) or society that does not assume individualist or subjective rationality.

Suggested Citation

  • Bongo Adi & Kenneth Amaeshi & Suminori Tokunaga, 2005. "Rational Choice, Scientific Method and Social Scientism," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 0509001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpmh:0509001
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/mhet/papers/0509/0509001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Metcalfe, J S, 2001. "Institutions and Progress," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 561-586, September.
    2. Paul J. Zak, 2005. "The Neuroeconomics of Trust," Experimental 0507004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Paul A. David, 2004. "Understanding the emergence of 'open science' institutions: functionalist economics in historical context," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 571-589, August.
    4. Stefano Brusoni, 2003. "Authority in the Age of Modularity," SPRU Working Paper Series 101, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    5. J. Doyne Farmer & Martin Shubik & Eric Smith, 2005. "Economics: the next physical science?," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1520, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giampaolo Garzarelli & Matthew Holian, 2014. "Parchment, guns, and the problem of governance," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 27(1), pages 71-80, March.
    2. Susan Helper & Mari Sako, 2010. "Management innovation in supply chain: appreciating Chandler in the twenty-first century," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 399-429, April.
    3. J. Stan Metcalfe & John Foster, 2010. "Evolutionary Growth Theory," Chapters, in: Mark Setterfield (ed.), Handbook of Alternative Theories of Economic Growth, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Mario Cimoli & Gabriel Porcile, 2014. "Technology, structural change and BOP-constrained growth: a structuralist toolbox," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 215-237.
    5. Andrea Prencipe, 2004. "Change, Coordination, and Capabilities," SPRU Working Paper Series 120, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    6. Consoli, Davide & Rentocchini, Francesco, 2015. "A taxonomy of multi-industry labour force skills," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1116-1132.
    7. Cimoli, Mario & Fleitas, Sebastian & Porcile, Gabriel, 2011. "Real Exchange Rate and the Structure of Exports," MPRA Paper 37846, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Anton, Roman, 2014. "Sustainable Intrapreneurship - The GSI Concept and Strategy - Unfolding Competitive Advantage via Fair Entrepreneurship," MPRA Paper 69713, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Feb 2015.
    9. Kraft-Todd, Gordon T. & Rand, David G., 2021. "Practice what you preach: Credibility-enhancing displays and the growth of open science," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-10.
    10. Dieter Ernst, 2005. "Limits to Modularity: Reflections on Recent Developments in Chip Design," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 303-335.
    11. Jean-Luc Gaffard, 2009. "Innovation, competition, and growth: Schumpeterian ideas within a Hicksian framework," Springer Books, in: Uwe Cantner & Jean-Luc Gaffard & Lionel Nesta (ed.), Schumpeterian Perspectives on Innovation, Competition and Growth, pages 7-23, Springer.
    12. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    13. Cimoli, Mario & Porcile, Gabriel, 2011. "Tecnologia, heterogeneidad y crecimiento: una caja de herramientas estructuralista [Technology, heterogeneity and Growth: A Structuralist Toolbox]," MPRA Paper 33801, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Binder, Martin & Witt, Ulrich, 2012. "A critical note on the role of the capability approach for sustainability economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 721-725.
    15. Ramlogan, Ronnie & Consoli, Davide, 2007. "Knowledge, Understanding and the Dynamics of Medical Innovation," European Journal of Economic and Social Systems, Lavoisier, vol. 20(2), pages 231-249.
    16. Vermeulen, Ben & De Kok, Ton, 2013. "A value network development model and implications for innovation and production network management," MPRA Paper 51393, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Haeussler, Carolin, 2011. "Information-sharing in academia and the industry: A comparative study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 105-122, February.
    18. Vicente-Saez, Ruben & Martinez-Fuentes, Clara, 2018. "Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 428-436.
    19. Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2015. "Leaders and followers: Perspectives on the Nordic model and the economics of innovation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 3-16.
    20. M. Hussain, 2014. "The Robustness of High Danish National Happiness: A Temporal Cross-Country Analysis of Population Subgroups," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 759-774, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Scientific Method; Social Scientism; Rational Choice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpmh:0509001. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.