[Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 2
Publication Information
Title: The Philosophy of Policy
Author: Takeshi Nakano
Publisher: Shueisha
Release Date: 2025/1/24
Hardcover: 352 pages
This article is the second in a series of introductory articles on "The Philosophy of Policy".
[Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 1: Mainstream Economics is Not Science
[Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 2: Roy Bhaskar's Philosophy of Science
[Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 3: What is the State, What is Policy
[Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 4: Incorporating Polanyi's Philosophy of Science
[Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 5: The World of Complex Systems
[Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 6: What is Politics
The Sense of Impasse Felt Even by Bureaucrats
The author, Takeshi Nakano, is an active METI bureaucrat and a critic.
He is originally a prolific writer, but between last year and this year, he has written two books that are likely important to him as well. One is "Introduction to Schumpeter", and the other is this book, "The Philosophy of Policy". I have already written an introductory article for "Introduction to Schumpeter".
And this book is also a bestseller that is still in the top 10 in the fields of political science and economics introductions on Amazon (as of 2025.05.16).
Nakano is a famous MMT proponent. He has published several books on MMT. If that Nakano is an active bureaucrat and is tied up in the fiscal balance theory of mainstream economics...
This book refutes that mainstream economics is not science, and discusses what kind of philosophy of policy should replace it.
Of course, this book is a work on the philosophy of excellent public policy, but at the same time, can't you hear the laments or grievances of talented bureaucrats who are forced to do boring work, unable to move because they are tied down by various things that can't even be called science—pseudo-science—as well as rules and council decisions? (Or is it just my own hearing, as I have poor hearing...💦)
Talented bureaucrats don't fall down for nothing.
This book is by no means an easy read, but it is not so difficult that it is completely impossible to understand either.
I would especially like young people aiming to become bureaucrats and those interested in social science to read it (...if I may be so bold...💦).
This article is not that long, but for those who do not like spoilers, I have posted a table of contents, so please jump to the section you wish to read. Thank you.
Bhaskar's Philosophy of Science
Chapter 2 of this book discusses Roy Bhaskar's philosophy of science, particularly the parts concerning natural science, and Chapter 3 discusses the parts concerning social science. It is something called critical realism or transcendental realism, and it seems to be gaining a certain amount of popularity among those aspiring to social science (p. 6).
Nakano's argument is as follows.
Interpreting "science" as broadly as possible and understanding it as "knowledge about reality (nature or society)"... if one has no knowledge about reality, it is impossible not only to implement national policy but even to conduct daily life, so... regardless of whether it is correct or incorrect, rigorous or naive... it must be said that any national policy is based on science in a broad sense.
In other words, when implementing national policy, some knowledge about reality is necessary, and he proposes that we call this some knowledge about reality science. And through this book, he intends to examine whether it is worthy of the name science, and then think about the philosophy of policy.
Regarding reality, Roy Bhaskar's philosophy of science calls it reality.
"Knowledge about reality" is supported by a theory about "reality" and a theory about "knowledge" (p. 4). The theory about reality is called "ontological philosophy," and the theory about knowledge is called "epistemological philosophy."
Hereafter, using these terms as a core, Nakano develops the philosophy of policy.
Transcendental Realism: Bhaskar's Philosophy of Natural Science
Before asking what the social science that forms the basis of policy is, let's look at what Bhaskar says and how he says it regarding natural science, which is generally accepted as established science.
Bhaskar's realism regarding natural science is called transcendental realism. Bhaskar argued the following regarding natural science (p. 58).
Science is "knowledge about things." Knowledge is something created by humans, produced through a certain type of social activity called inquiry by scientists. In that sense, science can be said to be something that depends on human activity. ...
Science must have both a dimension of "knowledge" created by social activity, and a dimension of "reality" such as objects and movements that are independent of scientific knowledge. Science cannot exist if either one is missing. This is Bhaskar's philosophy of science, "transcendental realism."
In other words,
Science has two aspects. A "transitive" aspect that depends on human activity and an "intransitive" aspect that exists independently of human activity.
From this, the following question is raised.
Can science exist without an intransitive world that is independent of human activity?.
The answer to this question is no, but by answering no to this question, he simultaneously refutes previous philosophies of science by stating that they cannot be philosophies of science (this includes Hume's empiricism, Kant's idealism, and positivism).
And
The object of knowledge is the structure or mechanism that generates phenomena. And knowledge is produced from the social activity called science.
And once again, it is confirmed that the object of scientific inquiry is an "automatic" thing independent of human activity or subjectivity.
There are several important concepts (though they are quite common-sense and intuitively easy to understand), so I will introduce them.
Open systems and closed systems
Hierarchical structure
Hierarchy and emergence
Retrospective and retroductive
Fallibilism and objective truth
Open systems and closed systems
Natural science is inseparable from experiments. According to Nakano, and perhaps according to Bhaskar, causal relationships are not clearly visible within actual social and natural phenomena in open systems. Experiments are the artificial creation of closed systems so that causal relationships can be clearly understood, p65.
Experiments cannot be conducted on social phenomena (although experiments for limited disciplines such as psychology are possible). In social science, a technique for handling open systems as open systems is required. It will be analyzed as "tendencies" rather than a strict chain of causal relationships, p70.
Hierarchical structure of the real world
There is a hierarchical structure that always appears in introductions to Bhaskar. It is the three-layer structure shown below.
Domain of the empirical: The world of events that humans can grasp empirically
Domain of the actual: The world of events that are actually occurring even if humans have not experienced them
Domain of the real: The domain where the generative mechanisms that can cause those events exist
Humans can only ever infer the generative mechanisms of events in the domain of the real through the domain of the empirical. As tools become more sophisticated, our experiences and observations accumulate and expand from the domain of the actual to the domain of the empirical, events = data are collected, and inferences about the domain of the real become more precise (through various theoretical constructions and modeling, etc.).
Hierarchy of generative mechanisms and emergence
Bhaskar states that generative mechanisms = the real not only exist in plurality, but also form a hierarchical structure and constitute a ranking, p72. For example, humans. Humans are living organisms, and living organisms are composed of matter. It is a "ranking of humans, living organisms, and matter," p73.
Emergence is, according to wiki, "the appearance of properties as a whole that are not merely the simple sum of the properties of the parts". In the human example mentioned earlier, the fact that matter gathers to become a living organism can be said to be the emergence of a living organism, or a life phenomenon, from matter. It can also be said that humans are the emergence of "humans," "mind," or "society" as such life phenomena gather further.
Emergence is, of course, a common property in the field of natural science, but it is a very important concept, especially when considering social science.
…This is because the 'society' that social science analyzes is considered to be something that exists in dependence on individuals while at the same time being something autonomous that cannot be reduced to individuals, in other words, something emergent.
Retroductive, retroductive
Bhaskar proposes a distinction in scientific methodology between procedures in pure science (retroductive) and procedures in applied science (retroductive) p76-p77.
-
Procedures in pure science (retroductive)
(1) 'Description' of law-like behavior
(2) 'Exploration' of possible explanations for the behavior using known phenomena as an analogy, known as 'retroduction'
(3) 'Scrutiny', examining and narrowing down other explanations
(4) 'Identification' of empirically manipulated causal mechanisms
-
Procedures in Applied Science(Retroduction)
(1) 'Decompose' complex phenomena into elements
(2) 'Redescribe' those elements using theoretical terms
(3) Through normatively stated propositions whose validity has been independently confirmed, 'retroduct' from the redescribed elements to the causes that produced them
(4) 'Eliminate' alternative explanations to narrow down the explanation to one
Explaining from the procedures in applied science, 'normatively stated propositions whose validity has been independently confirmed' refers to preceding pure science theories or concepts, and the operation of applying preceding theories to redescribed phenomena to identify their causal relationships is called 'retroduction'.
Procedures in pure science include an inference (retroduction) that 'moves from describing some phenomenon to describing what produces that phenomenon, or the conditions of that phenomenon.' It is not an infinitely continuing argument about 'which came first, the chicken or the egg,' but rather 'asking what the conditions are that make the existence of a chicken possible' is retroduction (p. 78). 'Through this retroduction, the object of analysis becomes not a specific preceding condition regarding a specific chicken or egg, but more broadly, the structure of the world that makes the survival of chickens possible' (p. 78).
Fallibilism and Objective Truth
| Fallibilism is the acceptance of 'mistakes.' Bhaskar's philosophy of science acknowledges that humans make mistakes. It also considers that there is a hierarchy of 'reality' that does not depend on 'knowledge.' In other words, Bhaskar's philosophy of science also acknowledges that there is an 'objective truth' (p. 79).
A fallibilist scientist, who operates on the premise that their own theory could be wrong, is prepared to accept and revise criticisms of their own theory. Fallibilism is an essential attitude for advancing science through criticism.
In other words, Bhaskar's philosophy of science acknowledges that fallible human beings can work together to reach an "objective truth."
Positivism asserts that once a theory is validated by perceived data, it is confirmed as certain and can be viewed as beyond criticism; Nakano warns that this has the potential to deny the progress of science (p. 80).
Critical Realism: Bhaskar's Philosophy of Social Science
Now, let us finally look at Bhaskar's philosophy of social science.
Bhaskar poses a core question for social science.
Is there such a thing as a social science that explores society, like natural science?
To give the conclusion first, Bhaskar answers that it is possible. So, what kind of society is one where social science can exist?
It is one where the social structure in question is autonomous from the individual humans who explore or act upon that social structure (p. 90). "Bhaskar argues that there is also an automatic dimension to meaning and belief in society. He calls such an assertion 'critical naturalism'" (p. 90).
In transcendental realism (realism regarding natural science), knowledge is a human activity, and the mechanisms that generate natural phenomena exist separately; this is a homologous system.
Conventional Thinking
In social science, there is a tradition of individualism on one side, and a tradition of collectivism on the other, and a debate has been waged between the two (p. 94).
Individualism is a position called "social atomism" or "methodological individualism" (p. 91), which attempts to explain social phenomena and social institutions as the result of individual decision-making, and is a position that does not recognize the existence of anything other than individuals in society" (p. 91). That seems extreme. Wait a minute? Isn't this the very position of mainstream economics, which "explains economic phenomena from the perspective of rational individuals who calculate and act to maximize their own self-interest"? Yes, mainstream economics is apparently a typical example of methodological individualism (p. 91).
So, what about the other side, collectivism? "Collectivism views society as something that exists outside of individuals as a 'thing' (this is called "reification"), and rather than explaining society from individual actions, it is a position that, conversely, explains individual actions from society."
Sublation of Individualism and Collectivism
Bhaskar's philosophy of social science—critical realism—does not favor either individualism or collectivism, but rather integrates the parts of each that can be utilized.
There are structures in society that constrain individuals. However, what forms and maintains society is, ultimately, the activities of the humans who belong to that society. Society exists separately from individuals, but at the same time, it exists in dependence on human activity.
Therefore, society constrains individual behavior, but it does not completely determine individual behavior, and it is not impossible for humans to cooperate and transform society. Society is not a physical object, but it does exist.
Structure and Agency
The problem of methodological individualism and methodological collectivism in social science is deeply connected to the ontological problem of "agency" and "structure" p106.
Methodological individualism assumes that the intentions and actions of agents form the structure of society, and attempts to explain the structure of society through the interpretation of the meaning of agents' intentions and actions. Conversely, methodological collectivism considers that the structure of society determines the intentions and actions of agents, and attempts to explain the intentions and actions of agents from the structure.
From the above, one cannot shake the impression that both methodological individualism and methodological collectivism are only telling half the truth. So, how are they half?
Therefore, the concept of emergence becomes important.
Emergence in Society
...the reality at a certain level emerges from the integration of multiple realities at a lower level. Reality, as a whole, has many different levels within it, and each level is a "part," but the parts also have parts at lower levels within them, and this nested structure continues endlessly...
And, while the entities at each level emerge from lower levels, they possess inherent causal powers that cannot be reduced, meaning they are relatively "autonomous."
By building on these concepts of "emergence" and the "autonomy" of structure, we can understand that while "structure (the whole)" and "agency (the part)" are inextricably linked, they are still distinct realities in the sense that neither can be reduced to the other. Structure and agency belong to different levels and each possesses its own inherent properties and causal powers.
In other words, what I am saying is...
Social science is a discipline that studies society formed by individual human beings, but the dynamics of society cannot be reduced solely to the actions and intentions of the people who constitute it. On the other hand, while there can be various structures in society, they are not fixed like physical objects, but are maintained and continuously changed by people in their daily lives. The various structures that form society are autonomous from people's actions and intentions (properties different from the collection of individuals appear through emergence), but they are not completely unchangeable.
The various structures that form society are scientific in that they are autonomous from people's actions and intentions.
In addition, this chapter discusses important arguments regarding economics, such as Lucas's critique of Keynesian economics (p. 96) and microeconomics and macroeconomics (p. 114). If you are interested, please refer directly to this book.
Future plans...
Next time, I plan to cover the chapters on the state and policy.
Regardless of whether it is within or outside of a quote, the distinction between bold and regular text was made by the author of this article.
Regarding numbers in the text, whether within or outside of quotes, the author of this article has used either Chinese numerals or Roman numerals based on what was judged to be easier to read at the time.
Also, corrections for errors in wording or to improve clarity are made as needed. Thank you for your understanding.
Bonus: For those who want to broaden their perspective or deepen their knowledge
I will list some things that caught my attention after a quick search.
There are some books I haven't read yet, but if they are helpful, please use them as a reference.
Works by Takeshi Nakano
MMT-related
Others: Works by Takeshi Nakano
As a writer and an active bureaucrat, Takeshi Nakano is so prolific that he makes one wonder, "How does he find the time to write all this?" Among them, I have picked out the ones that caught my attention.
I bought it but haven't been able to read it. I'm hesitating because of its thickness.
I want to read this.
An active bureaucrat can openly criticize the policies of their own government. I hope that such freedom of speech will continue to be guaranteed in the future.
Interview articles
The author speaks: Video
Milton Friedman
The infamous Chicago Boys and the Argentine economy that they ruined.
Works by Roy Bhaskar
An introductory book on Bhaskar's philosophy of science by another author
Extra: An Irish whiskey named Bhaskar
If you search on Amazon, the first thing that comes up for Bhaskar is an Irish whiskey. It seems to have a good reputation. Should I try drinking it?
It is apparently available at regular stores like Aeon or Don Quijote.
Rumor has it that the red one is particularly floral and delicious...
いいなと思ったら応援しよう！
ありがとうございます❣️よりよい記事を書くために使わせていただきます💫
Thank you for your support! I’ll put this toward creating higher-quality articles.