000			01412nam a22001577a 4500
999			_c514242 _d514242
008			201020b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aSaunders, Daniel _918753
245			_aOptimism for naturalized social metaphysics: a reply to hawley
260			_aPhilosophy of the Social Sciences
300			_a50(1), Mar, 2020: p.91-114
520			_aMetaphysics has undergone two major innovations in recent decades. First, naturalistic metaphysicians have argued that our best science provides an important source of evidence for metaphysical theories. Second, social metaphysicians have begun to explore the nature of social entities such as groups, institutions, and social categories. Surprisingly, these projects have largely kept their distance from one another. Katherine Hawley has recently argued that, unlike the natural sciences, the social sciences are not sufficiently successful to provide evidence about the metaphysical nature of social entities. By contrast, I defend an optimistic view of naturalistic social metaphysics. Drawing on a case study of research into contextual effects in social epidemiology, I show that social science can provide a valuable evidence for social metaphysicians.- Reproduced
650			_aNaturalized metaphysics, Social ontology, Social structures, Contextual _918748
773			_aPhilosophy of the Social Sciences
906			_aSOCIAL ONTOLOGY
942			_cAR