Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-lrvh5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-15T14:49:09.555Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The pros and cons of reverting to methodological individualism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2026

Olivier Morin Open the ORCID record for Olivier Morin [Opens in a new window]
Olivier Morin*
Affiliation:
Institut Jean Nicod, Département d’études cognitives, ENS, EHESS, CNRS, PSL University, Paris, France morin.olivier@pm.me https://www.oliviermorin.net/
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I read Singh’s stimulating proposal as a comeback to methodological individualism: social and cultural phenomena are driven by individual motivations, given by individuals’ subjective reasons for action. Singh’s version of this classic doctrine is useful when it leads him to question cultural group selection. But contrary to methodological individualism, the cognitive mechanisms shaping culture are not necessarily conscious, coherent, or causal.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e304
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barrett, J. L. (1999). Theological correctness: Cognitive constraint and the study of religion. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 11(4), 325–339.10.1163/157006899X00078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyer, P. (2007). Religion explained: The evolutionary origins of religious thought. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Culbertson, J., Franck, J., Braquet, G., Barrera Navarro, M., & Arnon, I. (2020). A learning bias for word order harmony: Evidence from speakers of non-harmonic languages. Cognition, 204, 104392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104392 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derex, M., Bonnefon, J.-F., Boyd, R., & Mesoudi, A. (2019). Causal understanding is not necessary for the improvement of culturally evolving technology. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(5), 446–452. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0567-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gintis, H. (2007). A framework for the unification of the behavioral sciences. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(1), 1–16; discussion 16–61. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X07000581 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gintis, H., Bowles, S., Boyd, R., & Fehr, E. (2003). Explaining altruistic behavior in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24(3), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00157-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, J. (2024). Methodological individualism. In Zalta, E. N., & Nodelman, U. (Eds), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2024). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/methodological-individualism/ Google Scholar
Henrich, J. (2016). The secret of our success: How culture is driving human evolution, domesticating our species, and making us smarter. Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400873296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewens, T. (2024). Cultural selection. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781009539043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morin, O. (2016). The disunity of cultural group selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, 34–35.10.1017/S0140525X15000199CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osiurak, F., & Reynaud, E. (2019). The elephant in the room: What matters cognitively in cumulative technological culture. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 43, e156. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X19003236 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richerson, P., Baldini, R., Bell, A. V., Demps, K., Frost, K., Hillis, V., Mathew, S., Newton, E. K., Naar, N., Newson, L., Ross, C., Smaldino, P. E., Waring, T. M., & Zefferman, M. (2016). Cultural group selection plays an essential role in explaining human cooperation: A sketch of the evidence. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, e30. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X1400106X CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sperber, D. (1997). Methodological individualism and cognitivism in the social sciences. Unpublished English version of “individualisme méthodologique et cognitivisme.” In Boudon, R., Chazel, F., & Bouvier, A. (Eds.), Cognition et sciences sociales (pp. 123–136). Presse Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Weber, M., & Tribe, K. (1921/2019). Economy and society: A new translation. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar