Francesco Di Iorio | Nankai University (original) (raw)

Books by Francesco Di Iorio

Palgrave Macmillan, 2023

Table of Contents (Volume 2)

Palgrave Macmillan, 2023

Table of contents (Volume 1)

Nankai university Press, 2021

This is a book in Chinese that I coeditd with Hu Jun

This book contributes to the developing dialogue between cognitive science and social sciences. I... more This book contributes to the developing dialogue between cognitive science and social sciences. It focuses on a central issue in both fields, i.e. the nature and the limitations of the rationality of beliefs and action. The development of cognitive science is one of the most important and fascinating intellectual advances of recent decades, and social scientists are paying increasing attention to the findings of this new branch of science that forces us to consider many classical issues related to epistemology and philosophy of action in a new light.

Analysis of the concept of rationality is a leitmotiv in the history of the social sciences and has involved endless disputes. Since it is difficult to give a precise definition of this concept, and there is a lack of agreement about its meaning, it is possible to say that there is a ‘mystery of rationality’. What is it to be rational? Is rationality merely instrumental or does it also involve the endorsement of values, i.e. the choice of goals? Should we consider rationality to be a normative principle or a descriptive one? Can rationality be only Cartesian or can it also be argumentative? Is rationality a conscious skill or a partly tacit one? This book, which has been written by an outstanding collection of authors, including both philosophers and social scientists, tries to make a useful contribution to the debates on these problems and shed some light on the mystery of rationality. The target audience primarily comprises researchers and experts in the field.

ポパーの批判的合理主義は多くの誤解を受けてきた。そのうち、著者のフランチェスコ・ディ・イオリオは、主流の社会科学の哲学者によって誤解されてきた「ポパーの世界３と方法論的個人主義との整合性」を見事... more ポパーの批判的合理主義は多くの誤解を受けてきた。そのうち、著者のフランチェスコ・ディ・イオリオは、主流の社会科学の哲学者によって誤解されてきた「ポパーの世界３と方法論的個人主義との整合性」を見事に論証している。存在論としてのポパーの世界３論は、唯心論や唯物論といった一元論だけでなく、デカルトの身心二元論の限界をも克服する第三の解決案である。ポパーの世界３論の理解なくしては、われわれを取り巻いている世界がどのように存在するかに関する実りある洞察は得られない。また、われわれの世界を理解するにあたって、方法論的個人主義とホーリズム、どちらの立場に立つかの論争は永い歴史をもっている。この問題に関しても、著者は明確な答えを示している。社会科学に属する個別学科領域の知的探求において、「ポパーの世界３と方法論的個人主義との整合性」を理解することは、知的成果の客観性を確保する道につながり、さらなる知識の成長を促す第一歩となるに違いない。

Unlike psychologistic paradigms, the non-atomistic variant of methodological individualism discus... more Unlike psychologistic paradigms, the non-atomistic variant of methodological individualism discussed in this book explains society in terms of complex emergent structures that unintentionally result from human actions, and that in turn influence those actions. Friedrich Hayek is an emblematic representative of this approach, the origins of which date back to the Scottish Enlightenment. One of Hayek’s most original – but also less well-known – contributions is his linking of this non–atomistic methodological individualism to a cognitive psychology centered on the idea that mind is both an interpretative device and a self-organizing system. This book uses Hayek’s reflections on mind as a starting point to investigate the concept of action from the standpoint of non-atomistic methodological individualism, and it explores the connections between Hayek’s cognitive psychology and approaches employed in various fields, such as phenomenology, hermeneutics, enactivism, neo-Weberian sociology and fallibilism. Focusing on the interpretative foundations of social life, the book conceives action as a product of the human mind’s cognitive autonomy, i.e. of its hermeneutic skills that are influenced by historical and socio-cultural factors..

“Di Iorio offers a new approach to Hayek’s Sensory Order, linking neuroscience to the old Verstehen tradition and to contemporary theories of self-organizing systems; this should be on the reading list of everyone who is interested in Hayek’s thought.” - Barry Smith, University at Buffalo, editor of The Monist

Journal Special Issues by Francesco Di Iorio

Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 2022

Special Issue: Selected Papers from the 2021 Joint Conference of the Asian Network for the Philos... more Special Issue: Selected Papers from the 2021 Joint Conference of the Asian Network for the Philosophy of the Social Sciences, the European Network for the Philosophy of the Social Sciences, and the Philosophy of Social Science Roundtable. Guest editor (with Chor-yung Cheung, Paul Dumouchel, Reiko Gotoh, Mark Tamthai, Kei Yoshida, Alban Bouvier, Byron Kaldis, Eleonora Montuschi, Julie Zahle, Jesús Zamora-Bonilla, David Henderson, Kareem Khalifa, Mark Risjord, Paul Roth, Deborah Tollefsen, Stephen Turner), Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Volume 52 Issue 1-2, January-March 2022

Philosophy of the Social Sciences (SAGE), 2020

Special Issue: Selected Papers from the Asian Conference on the Philosophy of the Social Sciences... more Special Issue: Selected Papers from the Asian Conference on the Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Nankai University, 1-2 June, 2019. Guest editors: Chor-yung Cheung (City University of Hong Kong), Francesco Di Iorio (Nankai university), Paul Dumouchel (Ritsumeikan University), Reiko Gotoh (Hitotsubashi University), Mark Tamthai (Payap University), Kei Yoshida (Waseda University), University), Philosophy of the Social Sciences (SAGE), Volume 50 Issue 3, June 2020.

Papers by Francesco Di Iorio

The Anthem Companion to Raymond Boudon, 2024

Raymond Boudon posits that methodological individualism (hereafter, MI) is an explanatory framewo... more Raymond Boudon posits that methodological individualism (hereafter, MI) is an explanatory framework characterized by two integral components: a micro-level analysis centered around rationality (where rationality does not mean necessarily that action must be explained in utilitarian terms) and a macro-level analysis focused on unintended aggregation effects. According to Boudon, this explanatory model aligns with the research practices employed by major social scientists who made substantial scientific contributions. This study unfolds in two parts. The initial segment (the first four sections) delves into a more comprehensive understanding of Boudon's MI by examining its relationship with key themes in social methodology. These themes include the demarcation between scientific and ideologically oriented explanations, the ontology of collective concepts, various forms of rationality, essential aspects of a comprehensive sociological approach, and the discourse surrounding explanations, deductive-nomological models, and mechanisms. The analysis in the first part of this study serves as a foundation for comprehending its second part. The latter, encompassing the last two sections, delves into Boudon's quest to validate the explanatory prowess of MI. Boudon scrutinizes the history of sociology, seeking evidence of implicit applications of MI with paradigmatic significance due to their prominence. According to Boudon, the historical trajectory of sociology attests to MI's capacity to elucidate a diverse range of crucial social phenomena, including social change, ideology, false beliefs, and moral sentiments-issues often traditionally explained through holism or methodological collectivism. Boudon contends that MI found application as an explanatory tool even among classical authors who either failed to articulate the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of their empirical accounts of the social realm or overtly embraced holism without practical implementation. This study zeroes in on Boudon's analysis of the implicit methodology employed by Tocqueville, whom he regards as one of the pioneering individualist sociologists. Additionally, the study examines Durkheim, highlighting the paradox between his methodological claims and the actual provision of an individualist account of magic and other social phenomena. Boudon and the Cognitive Function of the Social Sciences To grasp Boundon's conception of MI, it is essential to delve into his perspective on the nature and objectives of scientific social research. According to Boudon (1993, 4), social sciences have historically served three primary functions.

Springer eBooks, 2015

In Chap. 2 I analyzed Hayek’s criticism of behaviorism and other psychological theories. The purp... more In Chap. 2 I analyzed Hayek’s criticism of behaviorism and other psychological theories. The purpose of Chap. 3 is to show that similar arguments concerning the interpretative nature of cognition and the complexity of mind, which Hayek developed against materialistic psychologies, can also be used to undermine the socio-cultural determinism of methodological holism. The possibility that socio-cultural determinism can be criticized by using the idea that the mind is a self-organizing system is discussed only briefly in Hayek’s (1952b) The Sensory Order. However, the way in which Hayek used this idea to challenge socio-cultural determinism was his most original criticism of the theory of the heteronomy of sociological holism.

Social Science Information, 2024

This study reflects on Harold Kincaid and Jule Zahle's view that there is no necessary associatio... more This study reflects on Harold Kincaid and Jule Zahle's view that there is no necessary association between methodological individualism and agent-based models because the analysis of social phenomena in terms of the latter cannot always be regarded as an implementation of the former. Their view remains in contention with the standpoint of several philosophers of science and social scientists, including Chen and Di Iorio. Kincaid and Zahle's main argument against such a standpoint is that agent-based simulation is compatible with holistic explanations that are at odds with methodological individualism. The following study argues that Kincaid and Zahle's conclusion remains untenable since it stems from inaccurate historical assumptions concerning the tradition of methodological individualism and the way the individualism-holism debate is understood within this tradition.

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism, 2023

Daniel Little (born 1949) is chancellor emeritus and professor of philosophy at the University of... more Daniel Little (born 1949) is chancellor emeritus and professor of philosophy at the University of Michigan-Dearborn as well as professor of sociology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. He is one of the most influential living thinkers in the field of the philosophy and methodology of the social sciences and has written extensively on topics such as social explanation, Marx, the philosophy of history, organizational dysfunction, and the ethics of economic development. He has also provided a relevant contribution to the individualism-holism debate. Little (2012a, pp. 10, 12) rejects holism and praises an "an actor-centered approach to social explanation" on the ground that the methodological requirement of "microfoundations" for causal and structural claims is "a universal requirement on valid sociological research" (ibid., p. 12; see also Little, 2014). However, he partly questions the assumptions of methodological individualism because, in his opinion, this approach is committed to "reductionism" (Little, 2016, p. 78) in the sense that it considers individuals to be "a-social" because it does not take into account structural and socio-culturally variable constraints on action (ibid.). According to Little, methodological individualism is the view that "social explanations must be couched in terms of the laws of individual psychology" (1991, p. 192). He suggests rejecting this approach in favor of "methodological localism," an orientation that combines microfoundationalism with anti-reductionism (Little, 2014, p. 55): "providing microfoundations for a social fact does not mean the same as reducing the social fact to a collection of purely individual facts" (Little, 2016, p. 79). According to Little (1991, p. 183), methodological individualism consists of three related but distinct claims: an ontological thesis, "a thesis about the meaning of social concepts, and a thesis about explanation." In his opinion, the ontological thesis, which states that "social entities are nothing but ensembles of individuals," is trivially "true," while the two other claims are inadmissible (ibid., pp. 183-184). According to the meaning thesis, social

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism: Volume II, 2023

This chapter takes the form of a discussion between the editors of this volume and Joseph Agassi,... more This chapter takes the form of a discussion between the editors of this volume and Joseph Agassi, regarding the relationship between methodological individualism and institutional individualism. The focus is on Agassi’s interpretation of traditional methodological individualism in terms of psychologism; the role of institutions and structural factors in social explanation; Popper’s theory of World 3; the application of Weber’s interpretative approach—Verstehen—to typical ways of thinking and acting; and the Austrian School of economics.

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism: Volume 2, 2023

This chapter takes the form of a discussion between the editors of this volume and Steven Lukes, ... more This chapter takes the form of a discussion between the editors of this volume and Steven Lukes, one the most eminent critics of methodological individualism. The focus is on Lukes’ interpretation of methodological individualism in terms of linguistic exclusivism (i.e., naive reductionism), the multiple-realization problem, Boudon’s and Elster’s micro-foundationalist approach, ontological individualism, and the rationality of human action.

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism: Volume 2, 2023

This chapter analyzes and critiques an idea that is currently widespread in the philosophy of the... more This chapter analyzes and critiques an idea that is currently widespread in the philosophy of the social sciences, as well as among some proponents of analytical sociology, namely that methodological individualism (MI) is committed to reductionism.
As understood in this chapter, the concept of reductionism is a rehashed modern version of the ancient concept of atomism and describes the inability of certain sociological and economic approaches to take into account the systemic and socio-cultural constraints that influence individual action.

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism: Volume I, 2023

While methodological individualism is a fundamental approach within the social sciences, it is of... more While methodological individualism is a fundamental approach within the social sciences, it is often misunderstood. This highlights the need for a discursive and up-to-date reference work analyzing this approach’s classic arguments and assumptions in the light of contemporary issues in sociology, economics and philosophy. This two-volume handbook presents the first comprehensive overview of methodological individualism. Chapters discuss historical and contemporary debates surrounding this central approach within the social sciences, as well as cutting edge developments related to the individualist tradition with philosophical and scientific implications. Bringing together multiple contributions from the world’s leading experts on this important tradition of theorizing, this collective endeavor provides teachers, researchers and students in sociology, economics, and philosophy with a reliable and critical understanding of the founding principles, key thinkers and intellectual development of MI since the late 19th century.

Palgrave Macmillan, 2023

Table of Contents (Volume 2)

Palgrave Macmillan, 2023

Table of contents (Volume 1)

Nankai university Press, 2021

This is a book in Chinese that I coeditd with Hu Jun

Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 2022

Philosophy of the Social Sciences (SAGE), 2020

The Anthem Companion to Raymond Boudon, 2024

Springer eBooks, 2015

Social Science Information, 2024

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism, 2023

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism: Volume II, 2023

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism: Volume 2, 2023

The Palgrave Handbook of Methodological Individualism: Volume I, 2023

Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Aug 31, 2017

The title of this book Max Webers vergessene Zeitgenossen (Max Weber's Forgotten Contemporaries) ... more The title of this book Max Webers vergessene Zeitgenossen (Max Weber's Forgotten Contemporaries) is an intentional reference to Max Weber und seine Zeitgenossen (1). That book was published in 1988, and it was the German version of Max Weber's Contemporaries which had appeared the

Nuova Civiltà Delle Macchine, 2007

L'Année sociologique, 2020

Cet article analyse les rapports entre individualisme methodologique (IM) et reductionnisme, tels... more Cet article analyse les rapports entre individualisme methodologique (IM) et reductionnisme, tels qu’ils sont traites dans la litterature contemporaine en langue anglaise. Il s’articule autour de trois points cles. Premierement, il montre qu’il existe deux types d’interpretations reductionnistes de l’IM : celle en termes de reductionnisme psychologique et celle en termes de reductionnisme semantique, en precisant que cette derniere interpretation presente une variante nominaliste et une variante antinominaliste. Deuxiemement, l’article explique que ces differents types d’interpretations reductionnistes de l’IM sont incorrects. Troisiemement, l’article analyse et critique la these selon laquelle il faudrait remplacer l’IM par une nouvelle approche antireductionniste consideree comme une troisieme voie entre holisme et IM.

Social Science Information, 2022

According to the dominant view, analytical sociology is largely incompatible with the deductive-n... more According to the dominant view, analytical sociology is largely incompatible with the deductive-nomological model because the latter allows neither accurate and precise explanations, nor explanations that give individuals and their actions a privileged role. This view neglects two relevant facts about the deductive-nomological model as understood by Hempel and Popper and some of their precursors such as J.S. Mill and Weber. The first is the relationship between this model, situational analysis, and the use of probabilistic laws in explanation. The second is that, from the standpoint of the deductive-nomological theory, it is possible to make sense of social mechanisms in terms of Weber’s ideal–typical models. Like these models, mechanisms are functional for the development of concrete empirical sociological hypotheses that, without covering generalizations, lack explanatory power.

Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 2022

According to Searle’s theory of collective intentionality, the fundamental structure of any socie... more According to Searle’s theory of collective intentionality, the fundamental structure of any society can be accounted for in terms of cooperative mechanisms that create deontic relations. This paper criticizes Searle’s standpoint on the ground that, while his social ontology can make sense of simple systems of interaction like symphony orchestras and football teams, the whole coordinative structure of the modern market society cannot be explained solely in terms of we-intentional collaboration and deontic relations. As clarified by Hayek, because of its complexity, this society is a self-organizing system. It results not only from micro-level agreed constraints, but also from an unintended cybernetic mechanism that affects and shapes both its micro and macro dynamics via a circular causality. Searle ignores the coordination problem posed by complexity and provides strawman arguments against the theory of action underpinning the invisible hand explanation of social phenomena.

The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2021

It is evident that it is impossible to provide a commonly accepted definition of rationality, and... more It is evident that it is impossible to provide a commonly accepted definition of rationality, and that there is a lack of agreement on the meaning of the concept. As a consequence, it can be said that there is a ‘mystery of rationality’. What is it to be rational? The disagreements concerning the meaning of rationality can be related to (often intermingled) debates on six well-known dichotomies: (i) normative versus descriptive; (ii) instrumental versus non-instrumental; (iii) Cartesian versus non-Cartesian; (iv) tacit versus explicit; (v) explanation versus interpretation; and (vi); intended versus unintended.

1. Merleau-Ponty on Mind, Consciousness and Sociological Holism 2. Hayek's Symmetrical Line o... more 1. Merleau-Ponty on Mind, Consciousness and Sociological Holism 2. Hayek's Symmetrical Line of Reasoning ABSTRACT. Hayek's The Sensory Order and Merleau-Ponty's The Structure of Behavior share an original standpoint. These books crit- icize the assumptions of social holism on the basis of the idea that the mind is both an interpretative device and a self-organized sys- tem. According to social holism, consciousness - or at least a part of it - must be considered as a mere epiphenomenon of the social or economic context. For Hayek and Merleau-Ponty, since the mind is an interpretative apparatus maintaining a hermeneutical autonomy from the context, all the epiphenomenalist theories of consciousness are wrong. Although this criticism against social holism is empha- sized both in The Sensory Order and in The Structure of Behaviour, it is analyzed more carefully in Merleau-Ponty's book. Comparing these two authors' cognitive psychology allows a better understand- ing...

Selected papers from the conference will be published in a special issue of the SAGE journal Phil... more Selected papers from the conference will be published in a special issue of the SAGE journal Philosophy of the Social Sciences