Search results

Abstract
Steven Lukes and Alasdair MacIntyre have accused analytical action theory of being motivated by reductionist aims and of ignoring the fact that what is distinctively human about actions is their essentially social character. These reductionist aims are said to 'subvert' the search for the distinctively human. Enterprises that have particularly come under fire (and which Lukes recommends 'abandoning') are the search for 'basic' actions and attempts to solve problems regarding the 'individuation' of actions. Lukes and MacIntyre are mistaken however, both in their interpretation of the aims which motivate analytical action theory, and in their characterisation of the search for the distinctively human. 'lndividuated' or 'basic' actions are not complex social actions reduced down to their 'simplest elements'. They represent attempts to resolve problems which arise prior to the examination of the social character of actions.

This article relates the logic of literary interpretation to the logic of administrative action theory. It offers criteria for validating interpretations of administrative action. It shows how action theory can be rescued from misplaced claims of subjectivism by locating the meaning of an act with the intention of the actor. It also points out that both the meaning and the significance of an administrative action are related to interpretations and critiques of social situations. Interpretation and critique are then seen as prerequisites for planned social change.

Contemporary Action Theory, Volume I (Individual Action) is concerned with topics in philosophical action theory such as reasons and causes of action, intentions, freedom of will and of action, omissions and norms in legal and ethical contexts, as well as activity, passivity and competence from medical points of view. Cognitive trying, freedom of the will and agent causation are challenges in the discussion on computers in action. The Volume consists of contributions by leading experts in the field written specifically for this volume. No comparable volume currently exists

"In dem Beitrag wird Hartmut Essers Anspruch, eine 'general theory of action' vorgelegt zu haben, kritisch untersucht. Im Ergebnis zeigt sich, dass Essers Handlungstheorie behebbare Inkonsistenzen aufweist, die sich auf die Modellierung der theoretischen Aussagen beziehen. An dieser Stelle wird der Einsatz von Fuzzy-Logic für eine angemessenere und einfachere Modellierung vorgeschlagen. Grundsätzlich wird in Frage gestellt, ob die mit dem Framing-Konzept einhergehende 'Psychologisierung der Soziologie' der richtige Weg für eine Soziologie ist, die an der Erklärung sozialer Aggregationen interessiert ist." (Autorenreferat)

Quantitative researchers distinguish between causal and effect indicators. What are the analytic problems when both types of measures are present in a quantitative reasoned action analysis? To answer this question, the authors use data from a longitudinal study to estimate the association between two constructs central to reasoned action theory: behavioral beliefs and attitudes toward the behavior. The belief items are causal indicators that define a latent variable index while the attitude items are effect indicators that reflect the operation of a latent variable scale. The authors identify the issues when effect and causal indicators are present in a single analysis and conclude that both types of indicators can be incorporated into analyses of data based on the reasoned action approach.