International Relations. A self-Study Guide to Theory

by or reduced to individual, particular categories in order to be explained. Al-
ternatively, are there phenomena that cannot be expressed by reference to in-
dividuals/particulars and therefore require a different method to be known? 
For those wishing to conduct scientific experiments, these are questions of 
epistemology and methodology: do knowing and knowledge come about by 
knowing the whole (universal) or by accumulating the knowledge about the 
single, particular elements that comprise an entity? 
You know that in positivism, we can only know about the materi-
al/physical particulars (observables) because any knowledge rests on an em-
pirical foundation. It will be easy to follow that such an epistemological posi-
tion is associated with a specific method for how to obtain knowledge. Let us 
take a closer look.
Methodological individualism 
Methodological individualism is the claim of positivist science that phenom-
ena (natural as well as social) must be explained by showing how these phe-
nomena result from their individual parts or elements. How can one explain 
the features of something as a result of the structure of its atoms or mole-
cules? How can the social behavior of a group result from individual actions? 
As you can see from these questions, methodological individualism differs 
from ontological individualism. Ontological individualism (atomism/particu-
larism) is about existence or being; it holds the view that, for example, socie-
ty consists of individuals and the whole (society) is nothing more than the 
sum of the parts (the individuals). In the social sciences we find ontological 
individualism in the claim that society exists because of its elements, the sin-
gle parts. In turn, those single parts are individuals that finally and ultimately 
exist through their elementary particles – the natural substance of human be-
ing, their brains, DNA etc.
In contrast, methodological individualism is about giving an explanation. 
“Methodological” means to prescribe a certain method, rather than to make a 
substantive claim about reality. This view denies that social collectives such 
as states, associations, interest groups or business corporations can, for ex-
ample, be explained as autonomous decision makers or agents. A social sci-
ence that tries to explain social collectives should ground its theories in indi-
vidual action. Social collectives should be treated as the results of the organi-
zation of individuals’ particular acts. The basic unit of social life is the indi-

---

54 
vidual human action. Explanations of institutions and social change aim to 
show how these organizations arise as the result of the actions and interac-
tions of individuals. In short, explanations of macro-phenomena must be pro-
vided by micro-foundations. Methodological individualism methodically 
privileges an action-centered view of social scientific explanation. In the so-
cial sciences, this view was formulated by Max Weber (Economy and Socie-
ty, 1922); in economics, for example, by Friedrich Hayek (Individualism and 
Economic order, 1948). Individual actions are explained by references to the 
intentional states that motivate the individual actors. Methodological individ-
ualism forms an essential part of modern neoclassical economics. It analyzes 
collective action, or the structure and dynamics of economic institutions in 
terms of rational, utility-maximizing individuals (homo economicus). Meth-
odological individualism is therefore closely associated with rational choice 
theory (theory of rational choice or theory of rational action). Rational choice 
is not a substantive theory. It is an action theory, based on the assumption 
that individual actors are rational and seek to maximize utility. Individuals 
make decisions about how they should act by comparing the costs and bene-
fits of different courses of action. Social outcomes are results of those indi-
vidual choices.
The opposite of methodological individualism is methodological holism 
(for example, as formulated in the work of Emile Durkheim: The rules of so-