Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSivertsen, Sveinung Sundfør
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-03T12:43:55Z
dc.date.available2016-11-03T12:43:55Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.PublishedJournal of Social Ontology 2015, 1(2):301-319eng
dc.identifier.issn2196-9663
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1956/13051
dc.description.abstractAs part of his argument for a “Copernican revolution” in social ontology, Hans Bernhard Schmid (2005) argues that the individualistic approach to social ontology is critically flawed. This article rebuts his claim that the notion of mutual belief necessarily entails infinite iteration of beliefs about the intentions of others, and argues that collective action can arise from individual contributions without such iteration. What matters is whether or when there are grounds for belief, and while extant groups and social structures may be relevant to some forms of collective action, this does not show that all forms of collective action depends on such such pre-established collectivity.en_US
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherDe Gruytereng
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs CC BY-NC-NDeng
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/eng
dc.subjectCollective actioneng
dc.subjectIndividualistic approacheng
dc.subjectMutual beliefeng
dc.subjectInfinite iterationeng
dc.subjectCommon knowledgeeng
dc.titleNo need for infinite iteration. A Critique of the Collectivist Copernican Revolution in Social Ontologyeng
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2016-10-25T14:15:33Z
dc.description.versionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2015 by the authoreng
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1515/jso-2014-0026
dc.identifier.cristin1293543


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs CC BY-NC-ND
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs CC BY-NC-ND