Methodological individualism and agent-based computational simulation: A reply to Kincaid and Zahle
By: Iorio, Francesco Di
.
Material type: 
BookPublisher: Social Science informational Description: 63(2), Jun, 2024: p.155-167.Subject(s): Methodological Individualism, Agent-Based Models, Computational Simulation, Holistic Explanation, Individualism-Holism Debate, Philosophy of Social Science, Kincaid and Zahle, Chen and Di Iorio, Social Phenomena, Historical Assumptions, Epistemological Framework, Simulation Theory
In:
Social Science informationalSummary: This study critically engages with Harold Kincaid and Jule Zahle’s argument that agent-based computational models do not necessarily reflect methodological individualism. While Kincaid and Zahle contend that such models can accommodate holistic explanations, the reply challenges this view by tracing the historical and conceptual foundations of methodological individualism. It argues that their interpretation relies on flawed assumptions about the tradition and misrepresents the individualism-holism debate. Drawing on perspectives from philosophers and social scientists such as Chen and Di Iorio, the study defends the compatibility of agent-based simulation with individualist methodology and clarifies its epistemological role in analyzing social phenomena.. 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.- Reproduced
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/05390184241258370
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | 63(2), Jun, 2024: p.155-167 | Available | AR132940 |
This study critically engages with Harold Kincaid and Jule Zahle’s argument that agent-based computational models do not necessarily reflect methodological individualism. While Kincaid and Zahle contend that such models can accommodate holistic explanations, the reply challenges this view by tracing the historical and conceptual foundations of methodological individualism. It argues that their interpretation relies on flawed assumptions about the tradition and misrepresents the individualism-holism debate. Drawing on perspectives from philosophers and social scientists such as Chen and Di Iorio, the study defends the compatibility of agent-based simulation with individualist methodology and clarifies its epistemological role in analyzing social phenomena.. 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.- Reproduced
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/05390184241258370
There are no comments for this item.