Reply To Further Defenses Of Incentivization
Keywords
collective intentionality; institutional facts; Searle; we-intentions
Abstract
In a previous article, we challenged the “incentivization view” held by J. P. Smit, Filip Buekens, and Stan du Plessis as failing to cover social phenomena involving strict joint actions. The authors’ response to our criticism seriously misstates our main point. We have therefore, as briefly and sharply as we can, restated the problem in this note.
Publication Date
12-1-2017
Publication Title
Philosophy of the Social Sciences
Volume
47
Issue
6
Number of Pages
463-471
Document Type
Note
Personal Identifier
scopus
DOI Link
https://doi.org/10.1177/0048393117727247
Copyright Status
Unknown
Socpus ID
85033240918 (Scopus)
Source API URL
https://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85033240918
STARS Citation
Butchard, William and D’Amico, Robert, "Reply To Further Defenses Of Incentivization" (2017). Scopus Export 2015-2019. 7783.
https://stars.library.ucf.edu/scopus2015/7783