Ontogenesis versus Morphogenesis towards an anti-realist model of the constitution of society

Bouzanis, C. (2016) Ontogenesis versus Morphogenesis towards an anti-realist model of the constitution of society. Human Studies, 39(4), pp. 569-599. (doi:10.1007/s10746-015-9376-y)

118378.pdf - Accepted Version



This article firstly criticizes Margaret Archer’s Morphogenetic Approach for being indecisive about the realist notion of emergence it proposes as well as for her inadequate account of structural conditioning. It is argued that critical realists’ conceptualizations of emergence cannot but lead to inconsistencies about the adequate placement of agents as parts of emergent entities. The inconsistencies to which these conceptualizations lead necessitate an anti-realist model of the constitution of societies which takes into account that social structures are existentially dependent upon ideational elaboration. This alternative anti-realist theoretical perspective is provided by Ontogenesis, within the framework of which the realists’ idea of the ‘necessary and internal relations’ give their place to the ontological pervasiveness of the culturally shared imaginary schemata. Archer’s denial of a collective synchronic impact to social forms is implied in her analysis of morphogenetic cycles, according to which, structural elaboration post-dates social interaction; and this denial is also expressed in this very idea of emergent structures. Instead, for Ontogenesis, social forms are synchronically dependent on the collective impact of the differently socially placed agents, who have different interests and material resources, and whose interaction only becomes meaningful when drawing on these culturally shared imaginary schemata.

Item Type:Articles
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Bouzanis, Dr Christoforos
Authors: Bouzanis, C.
College/School:College of Social Sciences > Adam Smith Business School > Economics
Journal Name:Human Studies
ISSN (Online):1572-851X
Published Online:06 April 2016
Copyright Holders:Copyright © 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
First Published:First published in Human Studies 39(4): 569-599
Publisher Policy:Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record