Misology as a Methodology

Abstract

[From the Introduction] Misology as a methodology aims not only to answer what an individual, or a group of people said about a given concept, but also what is unsaid or said incorrectly, and why it is so. Thus, it does not narrowly mean to resent sound reasoning, and rather implies mistaken, incomplete, problematic, or unprofessional reasoning. For instance, rational choice theories tell us what a rational actor (A) would do in a given case, say to alley with B to alienate C in an election. But, in reality, these actors may not always act rationally, as anticipated by our theories. Why do they not? What is missing in their calculation that lead them to act “irrationally”? Or what is missing in our calculation that lead us to misunderstand rationality? The case becomes much more complicated when it is applied to a concept. For example, why do a group of people think about liberty in a way they do? What is missing in their interpretation of liberty?