Ratio via Machina: Three Standards of Mechanistic Explanation in Sociology

Recently, sociologists have expended much effort in attempts to define social mechanisms. We intervene in these debates by proposing that sociologists in fact have a choice to make between three standards of what constitutes a good mechanistic explanation: substantial, formal, and metaphorical mecha...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inSociological methods & research Vol. 46; no. 4; pp. 715 - 738
Main Authors Aviles, Natalie B., Reed, Isaac Ariail
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.11.2017
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Subjects
Causality
Classification
Critical realism
Explanation
Methodological approaches
Realism
Social mechanisms
Social Theories
Sociological theory
Sociologists
Sociology
critical realism
analytical sociology
metaphor
mechanism
explanation
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Recently, sociologists have expended much effort in attempts to define social mechanisms. We intervene in these debates by proposing that sociologists in fact have a choice to make between three standards of what constitutes a good mechanistic explanation: substantial, formal, and metaphorical mechanistic explanation. All three standards are active in the field, and we suggest that a more complete theory of mechanistic explanation in sociology must parse these three approaches to draw out the implicit evaluative criteria appropriate to each. Doing so will reveal quite different preferences for explanatory scope and nuance hidden under the ubiquitous term “social mechanism.” Finally, moving beyond extensive debates about realism and antirealism, we argue prescriptively against “mechanistic fundamentalism” for sociology and advocate for a more pluralistic understanding of social causality.
ISSN:0049-1241
1552-8294
DOI:10.1177/0049124115610350