View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by King's Research Portal King’s Research Portal DOI: 10.1093/cje/bex040 Document Version Peer reviewed version Link to publication record in King's Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Pratten, S. B. (2017). Trust and the Social Positioning Process. CAMBRIDGE JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 41(5), 1419-1436. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bex040 Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on King's Research Portal is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Post-Print version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognize and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. •Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research. •You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain •You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the Research Portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 09. Jul. 2020 Trust and the Social Positioning Process* 8th June 2017 Stephen Pratten School of Management and Business, King’s College London, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH Email: [email protected] Abstract When setting out, defending and exploring the implications of his specific position in social ontology Tony Lawson highlights the importance of trust. Despite the significance he attaches to trust Lawson does not provide an extended elaboration of the nature of trust but rather considers it in various contexts where his primary focus lies elsewhere. The purpose of the current paper is to examine how trust features in Lawson’s discussions. I identify three phases of argumentation where trust has some significant prominence in his work. Most recently Lawson when outlining his general socio-philosophical ontology describes trust as the essential glue binding society together. In earlier contributions he approaches trust from a developmental perspective and at times sees trust as a condition required for generalised human flourishing. I argue that a coherent and compelling account of the nature and significance of trust emerges from these discussions and that it is one that deserves further elaboration and critical attention. Resources in the form of certain complementary perspectives are identified that may help to flesh out aspects of Lawson’s account of trust. Key words: Trust, ontology, collective practice, norm JEL codes: B40, B41, B50 Word Count: 10, 336 *An earlier version of this paper was presented at the London Realist Workshop, SOAS, University of London in February 2017. I am grateful to the participants in the workshop and three anonymous referees of this journal for helpful comments and criticisms. 1 Trust and the Social Positioning Process 1. Introduction Tony Lawson has over the last three decades or so been concerned with setting out and defending a specific social ontology – that is in providing a general account of the social world. This social ontology provides a basis for questioning much of what goes on in mainstream economics. He shows that the implicit ontology presupposed by the methods of mainstream economics is unsustainable. Lawson demonstrates that once an ontological perspective is adopted the metaphysical commitments implied by these methods do not really constitute a serious contender as an account of the nature of the social realm. The profound problems associated with mainstream economics at this level have been masked by the persistent ontological neglect that has for so long characterised the discipline and which Lawson has done much to challenge. Lawson demonstrates that the ontological position he outlines has important advantages over not only the impoverished ontological vision implied by mainstream methods but also other altogether more coherent and carefully articulated alternative positions in social ontology.1 It is his defence of a particular social ontology that informs his various constructive contributions to methodology, ethics, the history of thought as well as his developed accounts of the nature of institutions, gender systems, money, and the corporation.2 Among the various categories that are important to Lawson as he articulates, elaborates and explores the implications of the general social ontology he defends is that of trust. A concern with trust has been a significant feature of his output over the years. Lawson emphasises in more recent contributions that our capacities of trusting and being trustworthy are nothing less than the ‘glue’ that binds social reality together – they are “the adhesive that enables the organisational structure to achieve a degree of binding” (2014: 27). In earlier writings Lawson displays what might usefully be referred to as a developmental orientation toward trust. In Economics and Reality, for example, he writes: “whereas in infancy the experience of trust, stability, sameness, and continuity is achieved through the parental maintenance of predictable caring routines, in adult life it is obtained in the routine modes of conduct that facilitate ‘going on’ generally. The performance of routines, in other words, is not only essential to the reproduction of social structure but is equally fundamental to the production and reproduction of each individual personality” (1997a: 181). When considering the implications of his ontological framework for ethics Lawson once again makes reference to trust suggesting specifically that “generalised human flourishing requires the proliferation of both trustworthiness and (where appropriate) trust” (2001: 65). Lawson thus sees trust as fundamental to any adequate account of the nature of the social world. Despite the importance that Lawson assigns to trust it remains a relatively under theorised category within his framework at least compared to the comprehensive accounts he offers of such terms as emergence, positions, collective practices, rights, obligations and norms. Trust is rarely Lawson’s primary focus - rather he comments on it as he addresses other issues and topics. Indeed some critical 1 For a sustained comparison of his own ontological project with that set out by John Searle, see Lawson (2016c). 2 For an outline and defence of Lawson’s approach to ontological theorising see Lawson (2015a). His treatment of institutions, gender systems, the corporation and money are detailed respectively in Lawson (2015b, 2007, 2015c and 2016a). 2 commentators on Lawson’s ontological project explicitly call for further clarification regarding his emphasis on trust.3 In this paper I pinpoint three phases of argumentation where trust figures especially prominently in Lawson’s work and argue that a coherent and compelling account of the nature and significance of trust emerges from these discussions and that it is one that deserves further elaboration.4 Particular aspects of Lawson’s account of trust that he has only partially elaborated upon are considered including how trust relates to processes of social positioning, the pervasive and often hidden nature of trust and its connection with human dependence/vulnerability. Resources are identified that can be used to productively extend Lawson’s developmental treatment of trust. In terms of his comments on ethics it is noted that on his understanding trust is primary in providing certain necessary conditions for human flourishing and yet limited in always needing to be significantly supplemented. Clarifying and drawing out some of the implications of Lawson’s treatment of trust can help us better understand both his general ontological framework and his account of certain key social existents central to economics. Lawson’s recent emphasis on trust as the glue binding society together is considered in section 2. Important features of this account of trust that Lawson only points to are explored in section 3. The developmental account of trust is the focus of section 4 where complementary perspectives are also discussed. How trust ties in with Lawson’s discussion of ethics and human flourishing is explored in section 5. Concluding remarks follow. 2. Positions, Collective Practices, Norms and Trust In order to appreciate the significance that Lawson attaches to trust it is necessary to review various key elements of his ontological framework. In fact quite a lot of context setting is required as, in his latest ontological elaborations, trust figures only after a series of other categories (emergence, collective practices, norms, etc.,) have been introduced. If Lawson’s recent comments on trust are considered without sufficient attention being paid to this broader framework their significance can be easily missed. For Lawson the category of social reality denotes the set or totality of all phenomena