 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
significant link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_mania Dancing_mania links to this page but many of the pages which would seek to explain or categorize "dancing mania" do not (they tend to various psychological explanations.)
Should some comment be made concerning Max Weber's "methodological individualism" to account for this curious focus on individuals for what appears definitely social (especially in categorization articles such as Mass_hysteria, Mass_Psychogenic_Illness, Dancing_Plague_of_1518, Tanganyika_Laughter_Epidemic.
The problem I see is this: Dancing_mania cannot be a "social phenomenon" and be "understood as a mass psychogenic illness" if Mass_Psychogenic_Illness is not also a social phenomenon.
If it is informative to state it of this sub-case, why is not also informatively stated of the more general case? Are there forms of Mass_Psychogenic_Illness which are not social phenomena in the sense stated in this article?
Which social phenomena are not psychological? Which are not economic? Which are not to be understood in game-theoretic or evolutionary terms?
Influence is surely not enough (raindrops in a cloud "influence" each other and are arguably very simple "systems" of molecules with "behavior" unlike that of ice crystals or snow flakes or non-condensing water vapor or contained liquid water or solid ice.) See recent British philosopher on the "behavior" of wind socks. G. Robert Shiplett 22:08, 6 January 2012 (UTC)