Book contents
- Morphogenesis Answers Its Critics
- Morphogenesis Answers Its Critics
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- 1 The Morphogenetic Approach and Its Trajectory: A First-Person Account by the Author
- Part I Culture
- Part II Structure
- 5 Misrepresenting SAC as Dualism
- 6 The Majority of Agents Are the Dead: Implications for Central Conflation
- 7 Can Structuration and Morphogenesis Be Compatible?
- Part III Agency
5 - Misrepresenting SAC as Dualism
from Part II - Structure
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2024
- Morphogenesis Answers Its Critics
- Morphogenesis Answers Its Critics
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- 1 The Morphogenetic Approach and Its Trajectory: A First-Person Account by the Author
- Part I Culture
- Part II Structure
- 5 Misrepresenting SAC as Dualism
- 6 The Majority of Agents Are the Dead: Implications for Central Conflation
- 7 Can Structuration and Morphogenesis Be Compatible?
- Part III Agency
Summary
Kemp refuses to distinguish philosophical dualism from the sociological analytical dualism of the M/M approach where two entities can be interdependent but are not inseperable. This makes him a Central Conflationist
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Morphogenesis Answers Its Critics , pp. 101 - 121Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024