Cambridge social ontology, the philosophical critique of modern economics and social positioning theory: an interview with Tony Lawson, part 2

ABSTRACT

In Part 1 of this wide-ranging interview, Tony Lawson discussed his role in, and relationship to, Critical Realism as well as various defences of mathematical modelling in economics. In Part 2 he turns more explicitly to social ontology, his social positioning theory, related concepts and various aspects of particular social phenomena. He discusses how he sees his positioning theory as one of several that address (without being restricted to) agent-structure issues, clarifies his take on on-going debates with Searle, Elder-Vass and others regarding emergence and causation, and provides several examples of applications of social positioning theory – including his latest thinking on the nature of money.

KEYWORDS:

• Tony Lawson
• Critical Realism
• social positioning theory
• John Searle
• emergence
• money

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 For information on and access to Lawson’s work and related activity visit: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/people/emeritus/tl27 and: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Lawson

2 See also in this series Archer and Morgan (2020); Rescher and Morgan (2020); Porpora and Morgan (2020); Lawson and Morgan (2021); Norrie and Morgan (2021).

3 Note from JM: for a take on Lawson’s significance as part of a Cambridge tradition see Martins (2014).

4 See also Morgan (2019, 2018a).

5 See also Faulkner, Pratten, and Runde (2017).

6 Note from JM: for elaboration see Lawson (2019) and more recently Lawson (forthcoming).

7 See, for example, Gills, Morgan, and Patomäki (2019).

8 Note from JM: since the Bank Charter Act of 1844, but with some variation for Scotland, Northern Ireland and crown dependencies.

9 Note from JM: the concept of trust is discussed in a variety of contexts in realist social theory. For example, Colledge, Morgan, and Tench (2014), Morgan and Sheehan (2015), Pratten (2017), Lawson (2001).

10 Note from JM: Lawson is referring to, for example, ‘There are only two theories of money which deserve the name … the commodity theory and the claim theory. From their very nature they are incompatible.’ – this 1917 quote from Schumpeter is often used by money theorists, e.g. Ingham (2004). For debate regarding Lawson on money see Lawson (2016d), Ingham (2018), Peacock (2017), Searle (2017).

11 Note from JM: we did not get onto the related issue of how different theories of money are built into different theories of capitalism, etc. – the idea of financial circuits as part of circuits of capitalism, etc. found in the later volumes of Marx’s Capital; or possible links between a labour theory of value, commodity form and the nature of money – not because Lawson has no opinion on these, I know that he has, and nor because they are uninteresting; there simply was not enough time (in an already relatively long discussion) and these would require extensive discussion or none.

12 Note from TL: In his Realist Theory of Science, Bhaskar writes:

The essence of hydrogen is its electronic structure because it is by reference to it that its powers of chemical reaction are explained; the essence of money is its function as a medium of exchange because it is by reference to this that e.g. the demand for it is explained. (Bhaskar 1997, 88)

13 Note from JM: though there is still dispute regarding whether and how to include money into standard mainstream theory and the link between this and dispute over the significance of how money is created, intermediation of loanable funds approaches, tacit barter assumptions, etc. For Lawson on Post Keynesians (major proponents of a money economy) see Dunn (2009).

14 Note from JM: The primary argument typically used is found in Hyman Minsky (1986).

15 Note from JM: on Global Wealth Chains see, for example, Morgan (2021). On separate entity status and Lawson on the corporation see Veldman and Willmott (2017).

16 Note from Jamie: according to Lawson (2019, 214) Dave Elder Vass writes ‘top-down causation occurs only when an entity has a causal impact on its own parts’. There is also work on emergence by Heikki Patomäki exploring the historicity of emergence in relation to, amongst other things, Searle and philosophy of mind (Patomäki 2020). On Elder-Vass see also Morgan (2014), on Searle (Morgan 2018b).

17 Note from JM: the Dictionary is edited by Mervyn Hartwig and provides extensive accounts of numerous concepts relevant to or discussed in Critical Realism (Hartwig 2015).

18 For example, estimates in 2020 put the remaining global carbon budget at between 238 and 349 GtCO₂ to achieve the Paris Agreement lower bound target of restricting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Global emissions were 55.3 GtCO_2e in 2018 and whilst governments have begun to commit to net zero by 2050, actual viable policies to achieve this are currently lacking. The UK, for example, committed in December 2020 to reduce emissions by 68% from the 1990 baseline by 2030, to put the country on track for net zero. This is a reduction to 260 MtCO₂. According to the UK Climate Change Commission, emissions were 480 MtCO2e in 2019 and remaining emissions sources are from stubborn sources (transport, household emissions, agriculture, basic manufacturing processes).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Tony Lawson

Tony Lawson is Emeritus Professor of Economics and Philosophy, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge. He is the author of numerous books and articles. Additional detail is given in the interview.

Jamie Morgan

Jamie Morgan is Professor of Economic Sociology at Leeds Beckett University. He co-edits the Real-World Economics Review with Edward Fullbrook. He has published widely in the fields of economics, political economy, philosophy, sociology and international politics.