Options
La singolare pluralità dei beni sociali. Ontologia sociale e dilemmi collettivi
Maison d'édition
Neuchâtel
Date de parution
2022
Mots-clés
- biens relationnels
- biens publics
- biens sociaux
- confiance
- coopération
- coordination
- dilemmes de l’action collective
- intentionnalité collective
- ontologie de l’économie
- solidité ontologique
- collective action dilemmas
- collective intentionality
- cooperation
- coordination
- ontological robustness
- ontology of economics
- public goods
- relational goods
- social goods
- trust
biens relationnels
biens publics
biens sociaux
confiance
coopération
coordination
dilemmes de l’action ...
intentionnalité colle...
ontologie de l’économ...
solidité ontologique
collective action dil...
collective intentiona...
cooperation
coordination
ontological robustnes...
ontology of economics...
public goods
relational goods
social goods
trust
Résumé
Selon certains philosophes et scientifiques sociaux, le rôle des théories économiques dans la société d’aujourd’hui est lié à une large diffusion de l’individualisme méthodologique selon lequel les biens communs sont la somme des bien-êtres des individus. Cependant, les évidentes difficultés de l’économie à orienter des efforts institutionnels pour faire face à certaines questions globales émergentes ont encouragé certains chercheurs à intégrer et repenser les ontologies liées à cette idée reçue. En parallèle, un intérêt philosophique croissant s’est développé dans les trois dernières décennies avec le but d’analyser les fondements épistémologiques et ontologiques des sciences sociales. Apparemment, ces deux tendances de recherche n’ont pas encore été systématiquement mises en relation afin de comprendre le statut ontologique des buts collectifs. Plus spécifiquement, ce n’est pas encore clair s’il existe des biens sociaux irréductibles et si la réponse à cette question pourrait favoriser une compréhension cohérente des actions de coopération des individus. À partir de recherches précédentes sur l’intentionnalité collective, cette dissertation affirme qu’une ontologie cohérente des biens sociaux irréductibles et réductibles est théoriquement acceptable et peut redéfinir les principales approches actuelles aux dilemmes de l’action collective, influencés par une catégorisation économique plutôt classique des biens. Ce travail de recherche analyse tout d’abord la façon dans laquelle l’influente théorie des biens publics a ouvert la voie à certaines impasses sociales et morales. On étudie également certaines propositions théoriques évoquant l’existence de biens relationnels et de ressources communes. On infirme donc la réduction ontologique de tous les biens sociaux à des biens individuels, en affirmant qu’un type spécifique de coopération, basée sur des we-intentions (“intentions communes”) et des we-reasoning (“raisonnements communs”), montre la vraisemblable existence de certains types de biens irréductiblement collectifs. En élargissant cette approche, on articule ultérieurement cette catégorisation en mettant l’accent sur le rôle de la fonction morale de certaines entités relationnelles et culturelles (comme la confiance et les narrations partagées) en termes de coopération dans des contextes incertains. Enfin, en appliquant la taxonomie aux impasses des actions collectives concernant le changement climatique, l’information digitale et l’éducation publique, on vérifie la cohérence de cette hypothèse et on montre qu’une approche ontologique pluraliste des biens sociaux est susceptible d’améliorer la compréhension morale des dilemmes sociaux actuels.
Abstract:
According to some philosophers and social scientists, mainstream economic theories currently play an unprecedented role in shaping human societies. This phenomenon can be linked to the dissemination of methodological individualism, where common goods are interpreted as reducible to aggregates of individuals' well-being. Nonetheless, some emergent difficulties of economics in coping with global institutional issues have encouraged some authors to revise that paradigm. In the last three decades, there has been a parallel growing philosophical interest in investigating social sciences' epistemological and ontological foundations. Unfortunately, these two research trends have often not communicated systematically enough to understand the specific ontology of collective aims. It is still unclear whether some irreducible social goods exist and how the answer to this question can set up a consistent understanding of cooperative actions. This dissertation addresses this issue, drawing on philosophical investigations about collective intentionality. It claims that a coherent ontological taxonomy of irreducible and reducible social goods is theoretically viable and can reframe prevailing approaches to collective action dilemmas influenced by the traditional economic categorisation of goods. The research begins by analysing how the influential theory of public goods has paved the way for some social and moral impasses. Furthermore, some theoretical proposals suggesting the existence of relational goods and common-pool resources are scrutinised. Hence, a refutation of the ontological reduction of all social goods to individual ones is developed, arguing that a specific form of cooperation, grounded in we-intentions and we-reasoning, shows the plausibility of the existence of some kinds of irreducible collective goods. Expanding on that view, a refinement of this categorisation of social goods is put forward by underlying the function of some relational entities, such as trust and shared sensemaking processes, in making cooperation robust in uncertain environments. Finally, by applying the taxonomy to collective action gridlocks regarding climate change, digital information, and public education, the consistency of this hypothesis is tested, showing that a pluralistic ontological account of social goods might improve the moral understanding of current social dilemmas.
Abstract:
According to some philosophers and social scientists, mainstream economic theories currently play an unprecedented role in shaping human societies. This phenomenon can be linked to the dissemination of methodological individualism, where common goods are interpreted as reducible to aggregates of individuals' well-being. Nonetheless, some emergent difficulties of economics in coping with global institutional issues have encouraged some authors to revise that paradigm. In the last three decades, there has been a parallel growing philosophical interest in investigating social sciences' epistemological and ontological foundations. Unfortunately, these two research trends have often not communicated systematically enough to understand the specific ontology of collective aims. It is still unclear whether some irreducible social goods exist and how the answer to this question can set up a consistent understanding of cooperative actions. This dissertation addresses this issue, drawing on philosophical investigations about collective intentionality. It claims that a coherent ontological taxonomy of irreducible and reducible social goods is theoretically viable and can reframe prevailing approaches to collective action dilemmas influenced by the traditional economic categorisation of goods. The research begins by analysing how the influential theory of public goods has paved the way for some social and moral impasses. Furthermore, some theoretical proposals suggesting the existence of relational goods and common-pool resources are scrutinised. Hence, a refutation of the ontological reduction of all social goods to individual ones is developed, arguing that a specific form of cooperation, grounded in we-intentions and we-reasoning, shows the plausibility of the existence of some kinds of irreducible collective goods. Expanding on that view, a refinement of this categorisation of social goods is put forward by underlying the function of some relational entities, such as trust and shared sensemaking processes, in making cooperation robust in uncertain environments. Finally, by applying the taxonomy to collective action gridlocks regarding climate change, digital information, and public education, the consistency of this hypothesis is tested, showing that a pluralistic ontological account of social goods might improve the moral understanding of current social dilemmas.
Notes
Doctorat, Université de Neuchâtel, Faculté des lettres et sciences humaines, Institut de philosophie
Identifiants
Type de publication
doctoral thesis
Dossier(s) à télécharger