archer et al cr essential readings 1998 bhaskar genl intro

8/21/2019 Archer Et Al Cr Essential Readings 1998 Bhaskar Genl Intro

1/25


2/25

CRITICA REAISM

Sine he pbiion of Roy hskrs A Realit Theory 0/ Science in 1975 ,

riil relism hs emerged s one ofhe mos powerl new direions in hephilosophy of siene nd soil siene offering rel lernie o bohposiiism nd pos modernism his reder is designed o mke essibe inone ome o ly person nd demi sden nd eher like keyredings o simle debe bo nd wihin riil relism.

he for prs of he reder orrespond o for prs of he wriings of Royhskr

•

pr one explores he rnsendenl relis phiosophy of sieneelbored in A Realist Theo o/Science• he seond seion exmines hskrs riil nrlis phiosophy of

soil siene• pr hree is deoed o he heory of explnory riiqe whih is

enrl o riil relism• he nl pr is deoed o he heme of dilei whih is enrl o

hskrs mos reen wriings

he olme inldes exrs from hskrs mos imporn books s wels seleions from ll of he oher mos imporn onribors o he riilrelis progrmme he olme lso inldes boh generl inrodion ndorigin inrodions o eh seion


3/25


4/25

CRITICAL REALISM

Essential Readings

dited by argaret rche� oy Bhaska�ndrew ollie� ony awson and

lan Norrie

London and New York


5/25

First pbshed 1998

by Routedge 1 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE

Smltaneousy pblished in the USA and Canadaby Rotledge

29 West 35th Street, New York NY 1000

© 1998 Seection and edtoral matter Margaret Acher, Roy BhaskaAndrew Coller, Tony Lawson and Alan Norie

Typeset n Garamond by ReneCatch Limited, Bngay, SolkPinted and bond in Geat Bitan by

J Internationa Ltd, Padstow Cornwal

All ights reserved. No pat of this book may be reprnted orrepodced or tilzed n any orm or by any eectonic,

mechanca, or other means now known o heeaftenvented, ncldng photocopying and ecodng, or n any

nformaton storage or retreval system, wthot permission nwitng rom the pblishers

British Libra Cataloguing in Publication DataA cataoge ecod or ths boo s avalable rom the Bitish Lbrary

Libra ofCongress Cataloguing in Publication DataA cataoge ecod or this book has been reqested

ISBN 05-96310 (hbk)ISBN 0-45-9632-9 (pbk)


6/25

C O N T E N T S

General introduction

PART I

Transcendental realism and science

1 Introduction: Basic texts and developments

ROY BHASKAR AND TONY LAWSON

Philosophy and scientic realism

ROY BHASKAR

The logic of scientic discovery

ROY BHASKAR

4 Conceptua and ntural necessity

R HARR AND EH MADDEN

5Abstraction A realist interpretationANDREW SAYER

ix

1

16

48

104

10

6 Economic science without experimentation / Abstraction 144

TONY LAWSON

PART II

Critical naturalism and social science

7 Introduction Realism in the social sciences

MARGARET ARCHER

8 Societies

ROY BHASKAR

v

187

189

06


7/25

C O N T E N T S

9 Sraied explanaion and Marx's concepon of hisory 258

ANDREW COLLIER

10 Realsm and socal scence

WILLIAM OTHWAITE

11 Realsm and social science: Some commens on Roy

Bhaskars The Possbliy of Nauralsm

TED BENTON

12 A realis social science

PETER MANICAS

13 Four conceps of social srucure

DOGLAS V. PORPORA

14 Realsm and morphogeness

MARGARET ARCHER

PART III

The theory of explanatory critiques

15 nroducon: Explanaory criiques

ROY BHASKAR AND ANDREW COLLIER

16 Reason as dalecc: Science, socal science and socals

ence

ROY EDGLEY

17 Facs and values: Theory and pracice / Reason and he

dialecc of human emancpaon /Deph raonaly and

change

ROY BHASKAR

18 Explanaion and emancipaon

ANDREW COLLER

19 Neuraliy in he social scences: On Bhaskars argumen

for an essenial emancpaory impulse n social scenceHUGH LACEY

20 Addressing he culural sysem

MARGARET A RCHE R

l

282

297

313

339

356

383

385

395

409

444

473

503


8/25

C O N T E N T S

2 The prxoogy of eg jdgemenALAN NORRIE

PART IV

544

Dialectic and dialectical critical realism

22 nrodcon: Decc nd decc crc resm 56

ROY BHASKAR AND ALAN NORRIE

23 Crc resm nd decc

ROY BHASKAR

24 Decc crc resm nd ehcsROY BHASKAR

25 The power of negve hnkng

ANDREW COLLIER

26 Resm nd formsm n ehcs

ANDREW COLLIER

575

64

688

695

27 The ms of jsce: Fndng fu n he crmn w 72ALAN NORRIE

28 Beween srcre nd dfference: Lws reony

ALAN NORRIE

Index

l

723

74


9/25


10/25

G E N E R AL I N T R O D U C T I O N

rtl resm s moement n phosophy nd the hmn senes nd

ognte prtes most losely ssoted wth n the sense of dentedwth or emntng from thogh by no mens restrted to the work ofRoy hskr. hs moement s now flly nternton nd mtdsplnry nd rgbly n the qrter entry sne the nt pbtonofA Realit The /Science (975) hs trnsformed the nteletl sene Atlest t the trn of the mlennm t presents n ntelletl hlenge toother phlosophes tht they n srely rese hs reder s desgned tomke essble n one ome to yperson nd dem stdent nd

teher lke key redngs to stmlte debte bot nd wthn rtlrelsmhe fo prts of the reder orrespond to fo prts of the wrtngs of Roy

hskr seton one to hs trancendental realit phosophy of sene ebor-ted n RS (975 978) nd sbseqently gmented nd rened; setontwo to hs critical naturalit phlosophy of sol sene rst systemtllypresented n PON (979 989 998) nd kewse deeloped; seton threeto the theory of explanat critique mplt n PON eborted n nmberof rtles pbshed n the erly 980s (see eg RR hpter 6) nd mostfy n SRH (986); nd seton for to the theme of dialectic on whhhskr hd pbshed sne the erly 980s bt ony fly deeoped n DPF(993) (nd P (994» xtrts from l for nonl books re nldedbelow hese theores dd not pper n n ntellet m nd thsntrodton w sy somethng bot the ontext n whh they rose swel s ther prnpl fetres

he term rtl resm rose by elson of the phrses trnsendentrelsm nd rtl ntrlsm bt hskr nd others n ths moement

he epted t sne rtl lke trnsendentl sggested fntes wthKnts phlosophy whe relsm ndted the dfferenes from t. It sholdbe noted tht the prnpl themes of eh seton both presppose nd de-eop the themes of the setons preedng t so tht there s dente ordn-ton to rtl resm hs hskr refers to the phosophy esposed nDPF nd P s dlet rtl relsm nd ths does rdy rene nd

X


11/25

C R I T I C A R E A L I S M E S S E N T I A L R E A D N G S

rework he heories of siene, soil siene nd ehis presened erlier;s he hs indied hey will be rher res in his rn o he hird(olizing) nd forh (reexie or rnsformiey pril) momens ofhis dilei philosophy Somehing wil now be sid bo he onexnd onen of he heories of rnsendenl relism, riil nrlism,expnory riiqe nd diei seqenilly by wy of generl inrod-ion o he redings exerped beow.

Transcendental realism

rnsendenl reism ws born in he onex of igoros riil iiyoriened gins he posiiis onepion of siene h hd domined hers wohirds of he wenieh enry his ws bsed sqrely on Hmen

empiriism, epiomized in he im of Mh h 'nrl lws were nohing b he mimei reprodion of fs in hogh, he obje of whih iso reple nd se he roble of new experiene is perhps mos fmiliro s rerospeiely in he gise of he logil posiiism of he Vienn irleof he 920s nd 930s whih mrried he episemologil empiriism ndredionism of Mh, Person nd Dhem wih he logil innoions ofFrege, Rssel nd Wigensein he posiiis ision of siene pioed on mnitic heory of sieni deelopmen nd deductivit heory of sieni

sre he k on he former me from hree min sores. Firs,from Popper nd (ex) Popperins like Lkos nd Feyerbend who rgedh i ws fsibiliy, no eribiliy, h ws he hllmrk of siene ndh i ws preisely in reolionry brekhroghs sh s hose ssoiedwih Gileo or insein h is episemogil signine ly. Seond,from Khn nd oher hisorins nd soiologiss of siene who drew srp-os enion o he re soil proesses inoed in he reprodion ndrnsformion of sieni knowledge in wh rii relism lled hernsiie (episemologil nd geohisorisoil) dimension of sieneFinly, from Wigenseinins sh s Hnson, olmin nd Sellrs wholhed on o he nonomisi or heorydependen nd mble hrerof fs in siene.

A problem for ll hese rends ws o ssin er onep of he onined independen reality of being of he inrnsiie or onologil dimension in he fe of he relativity of or knwledge in he rnsiie orepisemologil dimension his rose prirly ely in he debebo he possibiiy nd, ording o Khn nd Feyerbend, he iy

of mening rine s wel s inonsiseny in sieni hnge. Khn ndFeyerbend sggesed h i my ome o pss h no mening ws shredin ommon beween heory nd is sessor. his seemed o render prob-emi he ide of rionl hoie beween sh 'inommensrble heories nd een enorged (sperideis) sepiism bo he exisene of heoryindependen word. Howeer, if he reion beween he heories is

x


12/25

G E N E R A L I N T R O D UC T I O N

one of oni rer n merely differene is prespposes ey relernie ons of e ame world nd if one eory n explin moresignin penomen in erms of is desripions n e oer n inerms of it, en ere is rionl rierion for eory oie nd afrtiri posiie sense o e ide of sieni deelopmen oer ime (fRS p 248 . In is sor of wy riil relism lims o be ble o ombinend reonile ntlgical realim, epitemlgical relativim nd judgmentalratinality

e dediis eory of srre iniilly me nder re from mongoers Miel Srien Mry Hesse nd Rom Hrr for e lk of uciencyof Hmen rieri for sliy nd lw Hempelin rieri for explnionnd Ngelin rieri for e redion of one siene o noer more sione. is riiqe ws en generlized by Roy skr o inorpore e

lk of neceity for em lso skr rged posiiism old ssinneier e neessiy nor e niersliy nd in prilr e rnsfl-iy (in open nd losed sysems like of lws; nd for n onology ( ws irredible o episemology; (2 did no ideni e domins of erel e l nd e empiril; nd (3) ws bo sried llowingemergene nd differenied. is in effe for ree kinds of ntlgicaldepth wi my be smmrized by e oneps of intranitivity, tran/actuality nd tratcatin

e lynpin of dediism ws e PopperHempel eory of expln-ion ording o wi explnion proeeded by dedie sbsmpionnder niersl lws (inerpreed s empiril reglriies. Is riis poinedo oweer dedie sbsmpion ypilly does no explin bmerely generlizes e problem (for insne from wy does x e?' o 'wy doll xs en Insed w is reqired for genine explnion is s Wewelld ineiged gins Mill in e 850s nd mpbell gins Mills lerdy sessors in e 920s e inrodion of new oneps no lredyonined in e explnndm models piring plsible generie me-nisms nd e like. e new relism broke wi mpbells Kninismby llowing nder some ondiions ese oneps or models olddesribe newly idenied nd deeper or sbler or oerwise more reondieleels of reliy. eoreil eniies nd proesses iniilly imginielyposied s plsible explnions of obsered penomen old ome o beesblised s rel rog e onsrion eier of senseexendingeqipmen or of insrmens pble of deeing e effes of e penom-en. (In e ler se we inoke caual rierion for ribing reliy ee

no longer et percipi) All is srongly sggess vertical or eoreil rel-ism. Siene old now be seen s onining nd reiered proess ofmoemen from mnifes penomen rog reie modelling ndexperimenion or oer empiril onrols o e ideniion of eirgenerie ses wi now beome e new penomen o be explinede sriion of nre imposes erin dynmi logi o sieni

X


13/25

C R I T I C A L R E A L I S M E S S E N T I A L R E A D I N G S

disovery in whih progressivey deeper knowedge of ntrl neceit apteriri is novered

However riti or trnsendentl relism rged tht hrizntal ortrnsftl relism ws dditionly neessry to sstin the univerality

(within their rnge) of the workings of genertive mehnisms or lws hsit is ondition of the inteigibility of experimenttion tht the lws whihsiene identies nder experiment or nogosly losed onditions on-tine to hold (bt trnsftlly not s empiril regrities) extr-experimently And this provides the rtionle or grond for prtil ndpplied explntory dignosti explortory sienti work too Indeed thewhoe point of n experiment is to identify nivers (within its rnge) lwwhih by virte of the neessity for the experiment is not tly or evenless empirily so Lws then nd the workings of ntre hve to be n-

ysed dispositionly s the powers or more preisely tendenies of nderlying genertive mehnisms whih my on the one hnd the horizontspet be possessed nexerised exerised ntlized nd tizedndeteted or npereived; nd on the other the verti spet be dis-overed in n ongoing irredibly empiril openended proess of sientideveopment

A trnsendent rgment from the onditions of the possibility ofexperimenttion in siene ths estblishes t one the irredibility of

ontoogy of the theory of being to epistemoogy nd nove nonempiriistbt nonrtionlist nontist strtied nd differentited ontology thtis hrterized by the prevlene of sttres s wel s events (strti-tion) nd open systems s wel s losed (differentition)

hs let s revert to the three kinds of depth in trnsendentl relism(1) Intranitivity he Western philosophil trdition hs mistkeny nd

nthropoentriy reded the qestion of wht is to the qestion of whtwe n know his is the 'epitemic faacy (f RS p 36) epitomized byonepts like the empiril world Siene is soil prodt bt the meh-nisms it identies operte prior to nd independently of their disovery(existentil intrnsitivity) rnsitive nd intrnsitive dimensions mst bedistingished Filre to do so reslts in the reition of the flibe soiprodts of siene Of orse being ontins bt it is irredibe to know-edge experiene or ny other hmn ttribte or prodt he domin ofthe rel is distint from nd greter thn the domin of the empiri

(2) Tranfactuality he lws of ntre operte independently of the los-re or otherwise of the systems in whih they or nd the domin of the

rel is distint from nd greter thn the domin of the tl (nd hene theempiri too) Filre to ppreite this reslts in the fly of actualim,olpsing nd homogenizing reity One the biqity of open systems ndthe neessity for experimenttion or nlogos proedres re ppreitedthen lws mst be nlysed s trnsftl s niversl (within their rnge)bt neither tl nor empiril onstnt onjntions re proded not

x


14/25

G E N E R A L I N R O D U C T I O N

fnd ws pere independeny f bh he ndiins fr nd heir iden-iin Theretical explanatin fr heir pr explin lws in erms f hesrres whih n fr r perhps merely grnd hem, while hey repplied rns flly in he practical explnin f he phenmen hey -prde in pen sysems() here is tratcatin bh in nre, nd reeing i in siene, nd

bh () wihin single siene r sbje mer nd (b) beween series fhem

() Regniin f he sriin f nre nd he islin f nep f nrl neessiy disernible a pteriri lws he reslin f whe hs f philsphi prblems, ms nrisy he prblem findin, he nherized r i ndiin f pssibiliy f whih is -ism. hs if here is rel resn, led in is melr r mi nsi-

in, why wer bils rher hn freezes when i is heed, hen i mut d s( RS, hper -.6).

(b) he re mlipiiy f nrl mehnisms grnds re priyf sienes whih sdy hem en hgh ne kind f mehnism my beexplined r grnded in erms f nher, i nn neessriy be reded r explined wy in erms f i. Sh grnding is nsisen wih isemergence s h he rse f nre is differen hn i wd he been ifhe mre bsi srm lne pered; s h, inke r s rierin

fr reliy, he higherrder srre is re nd wrhy f sieni inesi-gin in is wn righ.his kes s nely he dmin f he sil sienes, where wh

Ohwie hs led he wexplnin rhdxy ws neer eenremey plsibe

Critical naturalism

Fr ms f is regnized hisry, h philsphy f he hmn sienes hsbeen dmined by dihmies nd dlisms. I ws he im f The Pibility f Naturalim rnsend hem () he erriding dihmy r spiws beween hyper-naturalitic pitivim nd n antinaturalitic hermeneutic, resled in he generin f qualed critical naturalim I disss his indeil immediey belw. (2) hen here ws he spi beween indiid-ism nd eiism (r hlism), whih riil nrlism wld resle byseeing siey relatinally nd s emergent () A nneed spli, pn whihhe debe b srre nd geny ws jined, ws beween he vluntar

im ssied wih he Weberin rdiin nd he recatin ssied wihhe Drkheimin ne his riil nrlism wld rnsend in is tranfrmatinal mdel f cial activity (4) hen here ws he dihmy beweenfs nd les, ms shrpy expressed in Hmes lw (disssed in he nexsein), whih riil nrlism wd refe in is hery f explanatrycritique. () hen, felling he psiiismhermeneis debe, ws he

Xl1


15/25

C R T C A L R E A L S M E S S E N A L R E A D N G S

diotomy between rean nd caue wi ritil ntrlism woldresole by sowing ow, one one rejeted Hmen sliy, resons oldbe ses ui generi on ritil relis oneption of slity. (6) Finllynderpinning mny of tese diotomies ws te dlism between mind ndbdy (or, more mrosopilly, beween soiety nd ntre), wi ritilntrlism wold oerome, by seeing mind s n emergent power of mtterin its ynchrnic emergent pwer materialim

The Pibility f Naturalim rst pblised in 1979, ws oriented primrily to e rst of tese qestions, wi ws weter soiety, nd mnpenomen generlly, old be sdied in e sme wy s ntre, i e , sien-tilly ere were two leding positions ( 1 ) A more or less nqliednrlism, wi ssered t ey old, wi normlly ook te form ofpitivim dominnt in te pilosopy nd prtie of te soil sienes Its

immedite pilosopil nteedents ly in e work of Hme, Mill, Mnd e Vienn irle, proiding e spine of te orodox oneption ofsiene wi it trnsplned to te soil world. (2) An ntintrlism,bsed on distintie oneption of te niqeness of te soil relm, tt iss preinterpreted, oneptlized or lingisi in rer hermeneutic eofil opposition to positiism. Its pilosopil nestry me fromDiltey, Simmel, Rikert nd Weber wo fsed Hegelin nd Kntindiotomies to prode ontrst between te penomenl world of nre

nd te intelligible world of freedom so s to grond diotomies betweensl explntion nd inerpretie nderstnding, e nomoteti nd ideo-grpi, e repetble nd e niqe, te relms of pysis nd of istoryIf positiism fond expression in te Drkeimin soiologil trdition ndin beiorism, srlism nd fntionlism, ermenetis did so inspets of te Weberin trdiion nd in penomenologil, etnometodo-logil nd interpretie sdies A disrimintion mst be mde witin teseond mp between tose wo sog to synesize or ombine positiistnd ermeneil priniples s s Weber nd Hberms, nd ose dl-ists, s s Gdmer or Win, wo denied positiism ny prse in temn spere (It sold be noted in pssing i is less esy to rter-ize e work of postsrlist or, more generlly, posmodernisttinkers. For te most prt tey dopt Nietzsen episemologilperspeiism on Hmen or positiist ontologil bse)

Now bot positiist nd ermenetiist iews, is te sndrd ntr-list nd nintrlist positions, sred n essenilly positiist ont ofntrl siene. If tis is, s ritil relists rge, fale en te possibility

rises of tird position () qlied, critical nd nonredtionist, naturalim bsed pon trnsendentl relist on of siene nd, s s,neessrily respeting (indeed gronded in) te speiity nd emergenproperties of te soil relm Moreoer if te positiist on of ntrlsiene is flse, en posiiiss e to mke ot speil se s to wyposiiism sold be niqely (nd most implsibly) pplible to te

XI


16/25

G E N E R A N R O D U C O N

hmn relm; nd hermeneiiss, for heir pr, he o ressess heir onrss . hs boh of Winhs wo min rgmens in his ery ineni TheIdea f a Scial Science (1959) re prsii on posiiis onoogy onsnonjnions of eens re neiher neessry nor sfien eiher for nrl orfor soi sieni ndersnding boh like re onerned wih he disoery of inelligibe onneions in heir sbje mer. Nor do he onepl nd he empiri joinly exhs he rel riil relism n lowh onepliy is disinie, wiho spposing h i is exhsie, ofsoil life.

e me elbore on his he soi word is hrerized by he ompeebsene of ws nd expnions onforming o he posiiis non Inresponse o his posiiiss pled h he soi world is mh more ompexhn he nrl world or h he lws h goern i n only be idenied

·some more bsi, e.g. nerophysioogi, leel. posiiiss re wrongo expe he soi sienes o nd onsn onjnions in he hmnworld, for hey re sre enogh in he nr; while hermeneiiss rewrong o onde from he bsene of sh onjnions h he hmnsienes re rdily nlike he nr sienes. osed sysems nno beriiy esblished in he hmn sienes , s ony wson hs shownin his onribions o Pr I, his does no men h he ideniion ofepisemilly signin nonrndom perns or resls nno proide he

empiril onros nd onrss h experimenion plys in physis ndhemisry. Moreoer he f h soil life is preinerpreed proides redymde sring poin for he soi sienes here re no grondsfor reing hese d s exhsie of he sbje mer of soi siene, sinorrigibe or heir operion s nonsl. hs rejeing Hmen sl-iy nd knowledging emergene llows s o see resons s ses, bses whih my, for insne, be rionlizions.

hs he hermeneil posiion is ofen bressed by he rgmen hhe hmn sienes re onerned wih he resons for gens behior ndh sh resons nno be nysed s ses For, rs, resons re nologily independen of he behior hey expin. Moreoer, seond, heyopere differen lngge eel (Wismnn) or belong o differenlnggegme (Wigensein) from ses nrl eens n likewisebe redesribed in erms of heir ses (for insne, os s brn). Frher-more, nless resons were sly efios in proding one rher hnnoher seqene of bodiy moemens, sonds or mrks, i is difl o seehow here n be gronds for preferring one reson explnion o noher,

nd indeed eeny he whole prie of giing reson explnions msome o pper s wiho rionle.

he posiie se for rii nrism rns on he exen o whih nindependen nlysis of he objes of soil nd psyhologil knowledge isonsisen wih he rnsendenl relis heory of siene. hs wheres onhe Weberin rdiion soi objes re seen s resl of, or onsied by

x


17/25

C R I C A L R E A L I S M E S S E N A L R E A D N G S

inenionl o meningl hmn behio, ending o olnism, nd onhe Dkheimin diion soil objes e seen s possessing life of heiown, exenl o nd oeing he indiidl ending o eiion, he iil elis onepion sesses h soiey is boh () peexising nd(nsendenlly nd slly) neessy ondiion fo inenionl geny(Dkheims insigh) b eqlly (b) s exising nd pesising only in ieof i On his onepion, hen soiey is boh he ondiion nd oome ofhmn geny nd hmn geny boh epodes nd nsfoms soiey.Howee hee is n impon symmey hee ny momen of imesoiey is pegien fo he indiidls who nee ee i, b meely epo-de o nsfom i he soil wold is lwys pesed. his is mjo diffeene beween hsks nsfomionl model of soil iiynd Giddenss heoy of sion whih Mge Ahe highlighs in

P 2. I mens h gens e lwys ing in wold of sl on-sins nd possibiliies h hey did no pode. Soil se, hen, isboh he eepesen ondiion nd he oninlly epoded oome ofinenionl hmn geny. hs people do no my o epode henle fmily o wok o ssin he pilis eonomy. Ye i is heninended onseqene (nd inexoble esl) of s i is he neessy on-diion fo, hei iiy

On his onepion in ons o he hemeneil pespeie hen,

os ons e boh oigible nd limied by he exisene ofnknowledged ondiions ninended onseqenes, i skills ndnonsios moiions; b in opposiion o he posiiis iew osons fom he indispensble sing poin of soil enqiy. he ns-fomionl model of soil iiy enils h soil life possesses e-sie nd noneleologil he s gens epode nd nsfom heey ses whih hey ilize (nd e onsined by) in hei sbsn-ie iiies I lso indies elionl onepion of he sbje meof soil siene, in ons o he mehodologil indiidlis nd ol-

leiis onepions heisi of he iliin (nd Webein) ndDkheimin diions of soil hogh. Reled o his is he onoesybo idel ypes Fo iil eliss he gonds fo bsion lie in heel siion (nd onologil deph) of ne nd soiey hey e nosbjeie lssiions of n ndiffeenied empiil eliy, bemps o gsp (fo exmple, in el deniions of foms of soil lifeledy ndesood in pesieni wy) peisely he geneie mehn-isms nd sl ses whih on in ll hei omplex nd mliple

deeminions fo he onee phenomen of hmn hisoy Closely on-need wih his is essessmen of Mx s, les in apital, sienielis ony o peexising mxis nd nonmxis inepeions Inis wke oo is essessmen of ohe fonding ges in he soil sienes(sh s Dkheim nd Webe) s ombining spes of elis nd some oohe nonelis mehod nd onology


18/25

G E N E R A L I N T R O D U C T I O N

er emerge feres of sol sysems whh, o he oo of s rero for srbg rely, be regrded s ntlgical lms orlsm, re mmedely derble from he rsformol model ofsol y. hese my be smmrzed s he oepdepedee,ydepedee d greer speme spey of sol srreshe sl erdepedey bewee so see d s sbje merspees relatinal m; wh he odo h so sysems rerslly ope he mos mpor epitemlgical m os forhe bsee of r or dese es sos prple, eessgrele o exsely expory (o prede) rer for he rolssessme of heores (A forh critial lm wll be dsssed he exseo.) Howeer sbje o (d, rgbly, js re o hese ql-os boh he hrers modes of heore d pped expo

whh rl relss spe pper possbe he sol, js s her sphere hs heore expo proeeds by esrpo of sg- feres, erodo o possble ses, lmo of eresd deo of he geere mehsm or sl srre work(whh ow beomes ew pheomeo o exp) (DRI); pped exp-o by esolo of omplex ee (e) o s ompoes, heoreledesrpo of hese ompoes, erodo o possbe eedes of heompoes d lmo of ere ses (RRR)

O r rlsm, he, he sol sees be sees exyhe sme sese s r oes, b wys whh re s dere (d spe) s her objes. If he hermeel srg po of sol see, some preoepzed so pre, leds o hem loser fy whhe rsedel d dlel mehods hrers of phosophy, ysgh o critical rlsm s dssoed by reeo o he f h heseforms of rgme re merely spees of he wder ges of rerodeoes fmlr o l he sees.

Explanatory critiques

The Pibility f Naturalim hd deed forh critical dfferee beweehe so d rl sees, eessed by he osdero h hesbje mer of so see ldes o js so objes b belefsbo hose sol objes (or p oher wy h so objes debelefs bo hemseles), mkg possbe explanatry critique of o-sosess (d beg), elg jdgemes of le d o who

prlel he dom of he rl sees, so dg moded formof sbse ethical naturalim, .e . , he bsee of brdgeble oglgp bewee semes of fs d les of he kd med by Hme,Weber d Moore. Ad he heory of expory rqe s mos eoom-ly preseed s refo of he phosoph orhodoxy kow sHmes lw h he rso from fl o ee semes,

l


19/25

C R I I C A L R E A L I S M : E S S E N T I A L R E A D I N G S

lthogh freqently mde (nd perhps een psyhologily neessry), Slogily indmissible

It need not be denied by the dote of Hmes w tht sl reltionsexist between ftl nd eltie sttements sh tht they motite,predispose or caually inuence eh other, bt it is sserted to be the se thtfts do not lgically entail es Dobt is immeditely st pon this by theleimpregnted hrter of mh soil sienti disorse his seemslosely bond p with the eimpregnted hrter of the soi relitytht the soil sienes re seeking to desribe nd explin, whih is sh thtthe best (most preise or rte or omplete) desription of soil sit-tion wil lmost ineitby be eltie, i.e, possess le implitionsHoweer the defender of Hmes w n still rge tht one is free to rejetthe e, so to spek, in the soil reity whih neessittes sh desrip-

tion It is for these sort of resons tht the rgments, prelent in the mid-nd te960s of Sere from instittion fts, Prior, Philipp Foot ndothers from fntionl fts nd Ansombes generliztion of their rg-ments throgh to the notion of orishing re ess thn logily ompellingFor one n lwys dispte tht promising, good wthes, knies or gns orthe orishing of some prtilr speies re themseles good things

he ritiqe of Hmes lw rely gets o the grond when we refse todetotlize or extrde (eg. by hyposttiztion) soi beiefs from the soieties

in whih they re fond, ie, whih inlde or ontin them nd in whihthey re in some mnner formed Sh beiefs my ptently be logillyontrditory, s dgley nd Arher note, or in some other wy, be flse tothe sbjet mtter they re abut And it is lerly within the remit of ftlsoil siene, whih indes in its sbjet mtter not jst soil objets bt,s soi objets, beliefs bot those objets, to show this Ifnd when it hs doneso we n pss immeditely to negtie etion of them nd of tionbsed on them, nd, ceteri paribu to positie etion of their rejetion.

he seond step is tken when we rejet the ide tht beiefs nnot besly explined If we he tre ont of the ses of sh fse beliefsthen we my pss immeditely to negtie eltion of those ses, ndthene to ny ondition, strtre or stte of ffirs fond to be neessry forthem, nd thene, ceteri paribu to positie eltion of tion direted tremoing or trnsforming those ses nd their onditions In ntshell, solier points ot, the theory of explntory ritiqe opens p the exitingpossibility tht we my be ble to diver les, where beliefs proe to beincmpatible with their own tre explntion

Let s now onsider some possibe rejoinders First, it might be objetedtht this refttion depends pon or eptne of the e tht trth is good nd fsity is n ill t tht this is so is ondition of ft disorse(n spet, s it were, of the logil geogrphy of the onept of beie), ndso it does not inole nything other thn onsidertions intrinsi to fts tolegitimte the dedtion of les, s is denied by Hmes lw.

ll


20/25

G E N E R A L N R O D C T I O N

Seod it is o obetio o poit out tt rut is ot e oly soilgood or flsiy te oly soil ill so tt te iferee semes of expltoryriique my be oerridde by oter osidertios Siee is oly oemog oer soil isiuios d rut mog umber of lues. utis does ot gisy te f oter igs beig equl tru is good dflsity is ill. ird it is te se e iferee from te egie elu-tio of sruure or stte of ffirs ouig for te flsiy of belief to positie elutio of tio riolly direed t rsformig it is oti-ge upo (i) substie teory d (ii) oree pril udgemets Thatsometig sould be doe ceteri paribu is udeible; what sould be doe is differet mter. It is perps is osidertio tt motites eysempsis o e importe of isider sred tit moemebsedkowledge s disti from grd teory .

Filly ll ese iferee semes oly old ceteri paribu oter tigsbeig equl. ut is s ext prllel i siei disourse impliciter oioke usl lw is o to sy w will ppe bu wt teds o ppeor wt would ppe ceteri paribu e ceteri paribu luse is oditiofor moig from ft o f i e opesysemi world o wi te lws ofture rsftully pply s mu s it is to moig from ft o lue ite prtil soil world of belief udgeme d tio. Were pilo-sopil ortodoxy poses rdil diotomies ritil relism ds isted

ext prllels. I is difult o to feel te eory of explory ri-tiques s deiiely refued Humes lw.

Diectic

e diletil pse of ritil relism ws iiied by e publitio ofDPF i 1993 (e priipl temes of wi were resumed i PE (1 994» is d ree mi obeties () e diletil erimet of riil rel-ism; (2) e deelopmet of geerl teory of dilei of wi Hegelidilei ould be sow to be speil limitig se; (3) te geerio ofe rudimets of tolizig riique of Wester pilosopy. DPF rguedtt determinate abence ws te oid e er of te Wester pilosopiltrdiio; it ws tis oep tt ws ruil o dileti oepwi i te ed Hegel ould ot susi t essyed rel deiio ofdileti s e abenting f cntraint (wi ould be iewed s abence) oabenting abence r ill pplible quie geerlly weter i te epistemietil or otologil domis; d it dumbred sysem of dileil

ritil relism (DR, te erms of wi were temseles relted dileti-lly is system ws omposed of rt mment (1M) of nn-identity -orrespodig rougly o rsedel relism; end dileil edge (2E),piotig o te otio of bsee d oer oeps of negativity; third level(3L), reolig roud otios of ttality olisti uslity d e like d furth dimenin (4D, turig o tranfrmative praxi e uity of teory d

I


21/25

C R I C A L R E A L I S M E S S E N I A R E A D I N G S

pactice in pactice and so on. It should be noted that even though the tiadicHegelian dialectic of identity negativity and totality shaed two of thesetems in common thei content in the citical ealist dialectic is adicallydiffeent. Thus DPF agued that Hegel ultimately could not sustain ealnegativity and that his totalities wee all essentially closed athe than open.The upshot of DPF is that the moal good moe specically a vision of afeely ouishing society is implicit in evey expessively veacious action oemak Moal ealism is hee now combined with ethical natualism; andthe theoy of explanatoy citique is conjoined with a vey adical emancipa-toy axiology tuning on the theoeticopactical duality of evey judgementand act. Thee is objective good but it cannot necessaily o nomally beidentied with the actually existing moality of any paticula society

The intoduction to Pat IV outlines some of the main themes of DP

Hee it will be sufcient to contextualize it and say a little about its stuctueand its elation to pedialectical citical ealism. I have aleady noticed thatcitical ealists tended to (and wee in pat motivated by) a eassessment ofMax as a scientic ealist at least in apital Thee he maintains thatexplanatoy stuctues (o in his favoued teminology essential elations)ae (a) distinct fom (b) often and even nomally out of phase with (ie.disjoint fom) and (c) pehaps in opposition to the phenomena (o phenomenal foms) they geneate But Max neve satisfactoily theoized his scien

tic as distinct fom mateial object ealism. This togethe with fou otheimbalances o asymmeties in his intellectual fomation viz. the unde-development of (i) his citique of empiicism in compaison with his citiqueof idealism (ii) of the theme of () objectivity as distinct fom (�) labou (i .e . of the intansitive in contast with the tansitive dimension) (iii) and ofnomativity in elation to geohistoicity (i.e. of the intinsic judgementally ational within the extinsic epistemically elative aspect ofthe tansitive dimension) and (iv) of the eseach pogamme of geohistoical mateialism in compaison with the citique of political economyhelped to account fo all of () Max matue etun to Hegel (2) the Hege-lian esidues in Maxist thought (3) the ambivalences and contadictoytendencies within his witings and (4) the tendency fo Maxist epistemologyto uctuate between a sophisticated idealism (oughly � without ) and acude mateialism (oughly without �). Be that as it may this inevitablyled to the eopening of the question of the natue of the Maxian dialecticand of Maxs elation to Hegel

Thee is a emakable consistency in Marxs citicisms of Hegel fom 1843

to 1873 These tun fomally on Hegels subjectpedicate invesions(including the citique of his idealistic sociology which confounds alienationand objectication thus implicating Hegel in a metaphysical closue andbetaying the pesence of what Bhaska calls ontological monovalence, i e. thegeneation of a puely positive account of being the absenting of absencewhich is the cadinal mistake of Westen philosophy) his pinciple of iden


22/25

G E N E R A L I N R O D UC I O N

tity (invoving the reduction of being to thought i.e. the epistemic falacy)and his ogica mysticism (including the reduction of science to philosophyi .e . the 'speculative ilusion) and substantively on his failure to sustain theautonomy or intransitivity of nature and the geohistoricity i.e. the nonmonovaent character of social forms. Notoriously Marx never realized hiswish to mae accessible to the ordinary human intelligence in two or threeprinters sheets what is ratinal in the methd which Hege discovered and atthe same time mystied. This sets the agenda for Bhasars project in DPFwhich is conceived as an essentialy preserative generaization and enrich-ment of critical realism but a nonpreservative subation of Hegelian dia-lectic. Before I turn to the rational erne and the mytica shel in theHegelian dialectic it is worth setching a plausible critical reaist reconstruction of Marxs dialectic

Thus: Marx understood his diaectic as cientic because it set out toexpain the contradictions in thought and the crises of socioeconomic ife interms of the particuary contradictory essentia relations generating them ashitrical because it was both rooted in and (conditionally) an agent of thechanges in the very relationships and circumstances it described as criticalbecause it demonstrated the historical conditions of vaidity and imits ofadequacy of the categories doctrines and practices it explained and as ytematic, because it sought to trace the various historica tendencies and contra-

dictions of capitaism bac to certain existentially constitutive features of itsmode o production. The most important of these were the contradictionsbetween the usevaue and value of the commodity and between the concreteusefu and abstract social aspects of the labour it embodies. These contradictions together with the other structural and historical contradictions theyground are both (a) real inuive ppitin in that the terms or poles of thecontradictions existentialy presuppose each other and (b) internally related toa mystifying form of appearance. Such dialectical contradictions do not violate the principle of noncontradiction for they may be cnitently decribed

Nor are they scienticaly absurd for the notion of a real inverted orotherwise mystifying misrepresentation of a rea object generated by theobject concerned is readiy accommodatable within a nonempiricist tratiedontoogy in which thought is included within reaity not hypostatized.

What of the rationa ernel and the mystical shell? The rationa ernel ofthe Hegeian dialectic is essentially an epistemologica earning process inwhich inconsistencies are progressively remedied by resort to greater depthand/or (more generay) totaity. Thus the Hegelian diaectic nctions in one

or other of two basic modes ( 1 ) by bringing out what is impicit but notexpicitly articulated in some notion or (2) by repairing some want lac orinadequacy in it. In either case some abence or incmpletene in the pre-existing conceptual eld comes to be experienced as an incnitency which isremedied by resort to a greater ttality This is essentially the epistemologicadialectic called the logic of scientic discovery presented in RTS Chapter

I


23/25

C R T C A L R E A L S M : E S S E N T I A R E A D N G S

ad evisied as a dialecic of uh i DPF Chape 32 The sical shell ofHegelia dialecics is oological oovalece aifes inte alia i heabsece of he cocep of deeiae absece ad wih i of ucacelledcoadicio ope oali ad ogoig asfoaive paxis.

Fo DCR dialecic is esseiall he posiive ideicaio ad eliiaio of absences whehe he coceived as ague chage o he augeaio of (o aspiaio o) feedo. Fo hese deped upo he posiiveideicaio ad eliiaio of isakes saes of affais ad cosais allof which ca be see as ivolvig o depedig upo abseces. Ideedabsece is oologicall pio o ad he codiio fo pesece o posiivebeig I icludes pocesses as well as saes (poducs) ad saesipocessas well as pocessisaes. Moeove i opes up i wha DCR sles hedialecic of dialecical ad aalical easoig (i which dialecical easo

ig oveeaches bu coais aalical easoig) he ciique of he xi ofhe subjec i he adiioal subecpedicae fo Mos chaaceisicalli he idei hikig of he aalical pobleaic. Ideed i is heabsece of he cocep of absece i oological oovalece ha udepishe failues of adiioal philosoph eve a M

The oes of he sse of DCR will ow be bie eheased. 1M ischaaceied b oidei elaios such as hose ivolved i he ciiqueof he episeic ad ahopic fallacies of idei heo ad acualis.

Uied b he cocep of alei i ephasies scieic iasiiviefeeial deache (he pocess wheeb we deach he efee (ad efeeial ac) fo ha o which i efes) he eali piciple ad oologwhich i ecessiaes Moe coceel 1M fases o o he ascedeallecessa saicaio ad diffeeiaio of he wold eailig coceps ofcausal powes ad geeaive echaiss alehic uh ad asfacualiaua ecessi ad aual kids Alethi tuth is he uh of o ealeaso(s) fo o dialecical goud of things as disic fo popositions. Thisis possible i viue of he oological saicaio of he wold ad aaiable i viue of he daic chaace of sciece social sciece explaaociique ad eacipao axiolog. I is he cocep of alehic uh ha ishe goud fo he ascedeal ealis esoluio of pobles such as hoseof iducio which aise fo acualiig desaiig aue (ad hesciece) ad fo he explaao ciical efuaio of Hues law

2 is uied b he caego of absece fo which as I shall shol showhe whole cicle of MD liks ad elaios ca be deived. Is ciicalcuig edge is aied a he Paeidea docie of oological ooval

ece he Plaoic aalsis of egaio i es of diffeece ad he Kaiaaalsis of egaive io posiive pedicaes. I spas he gau of caegoiesof egaivi coadicio ad ciique I ephasies he iui of causali space ad ie i esed hhic spaialiig pocess heaiighe pesece of he pas ad exiseiall cosiuive pocess. Coadicios which fall ude 2, iclude ieal ad exeal foal logical ad

ll


24/25

G E N E R A L I N T R O D C T I O N

dialecical ones Dialecical conadicions ae uuall exclusive inenallelaed opposiions conveing endencies o change. If he dialecics of 1Mae os chaaceisicall of saicaion and gound hose of 2E ae pic-all of pocess ansiion fonie and node; bu also geneall of opposiionincluding evesal.

3L is unied b he caego of oali. I pinpoins he eo of ono-logical exensionalis including he hposaiaion of hough. I enco-passes such caegoies and hees as eexivi eegence anscendenceconsellaionali holisic causali concee univesali and singulaiinenal elaionali and inaacivi bu also deoaliaion alienaionspli and spli off TINA foaion illici fusion and ssue. Is dialecicsae of cene and peiphe fo and conen gue and gound geneaivesepaaion and dealienaion eoaliaion in a uniindivesi.

4D is unied b he caego of ansfoaive paxis o agenc In hehuan sphee i is iplici in he ohe hee oens. Thee is a specialafni wih 2E since agenc is (inenional) causali which is abseningAgenc is susained philosophicall in opposiion o dualisic disebodien and educionis eicaion b an eegen powes aeialis oien-aion and subsanivel b he concep of fouplana social being. On hisgenealiaion of ciical naualis social life qua oali is consiued bfou dialecicall inedependen planes: of aeial ansacions wih naue

inepesonal elaions social sucues and he saicaion of he pesonali. And he oal evoluion of he species like he ue geneall isconceived as open Is dialecics ae he sie of ideological and aeial sug-gles bu also of absolue eason (he uni of heo and pacice in pacice)and i incopoaes DCRs dialecic of desie o feedo.

Le e give b wa of conclusion an indicaion of how dialecical ciicalealis can be dialecicall pesened. We a sa wih he concep ofabsence sa as anifes in desie. This iediael gives us he conceps ofefeenial deachen exisenial inansiivi and hence onolog

Whence we poceed o classicaion and causali. Wih he s glipse ofonological sucue we have alehic uh and he ansfacual efcac iaffods Bu o cause is o negae and all negaion is in spaceie and so wehave he enie ange of 2E caegoies fo consain o dialecical cona-dicion o hhic spaioepoal efcac The conadicions wihin andbeween eniies ield eegence and hence i s a sho oue o he 3Lcaegoies of oali holisic causali and concee univesal = singula.Toali is inwadied as inte alia he eexivi shown in judgeen and

he onioing of pacice. Now in he eal of 4D in viue of he anscendenal necessi of social sucue fo pacice we can deive fo hesole peiss of he acividependence of social sucue he ans-foaional odel of social acivi he elaional social paadig and heepiseological onological elaional and ciical liis on naualisincluding he deivaion of values fo facs In viue of ou inenional

XXl


25/25

C R T I C A L R E A L I S M E S S E N T A L R E A D I N G S

ebodied aecy to act is to abset ad i desie o the soidaity ipiciti the duciaiess of the judeet fo the obect of ou absetiaecy is costait. The by the loic of diaectical uivesaliability weae dive to abset a diaecticay siia costaits ad the to absetcostaits as such i vitue of thei bei dialecticaly siia; ad ally toeae o the basis of the poessive eealiatio of the cocept of feedo to icopoate ouishi ad potetialities fo deveopet ad theeative eeaiatio of costait to icude ils ad eediable abseceseeally i the totalii depth paxis that would ushe i the eudaeois-tic o ood society which i this way ca be show to be aleady iplicit ithe ost eeetal desie.

R.B.

Notes

1 Its publication coincides with the second Annual Conference of the Centre forCritical Realism CCR) which is a registered educational charity designed to promote and network for critica realism; and the estabishment of the InternationalAssociation for Critical Reaism (IACR), a democratically constituted membershipbody afliated to the CCR

2 Popular Scientic Lectues, 1 894, p 1923 N Philosophy of the Social Sciences, London, 1987.4 C A Donegan, 'The Popper-Hempel Theory Reconsidered, Philosophical Analysis

and History, ed. W. Dray, New York, 1966A references n the text refer to the origina books.

Acknowledgements

I woud ike to take this oppotuity to thak y felow Tustees of the ete fo itical Reais (R) aey Maaet Ache Adew olieToy awso Ala Noie ad Sea Vetia ad al those icludi Mike

Jellicoe Robeta Keea ad Maia Pea who have heped i its establishet ad that of the Iteatioa Associatio fo itical Reais (IAR).I a eoousy idebted to Aa Javis of Routede fo oaisi adsupevisi the lauch of the Citical Realis: Inteventions Seies ad fo thepublicatio with exepay efciecy ad apidity of Citical Realis:Eential Readings ad the ew editio of The Possibility of Natualis Thaksae also due to Steve Jaa Beida Deabeh ad eveyoe ese atRoutlede coceed with the poductio of these two iitial books i whatlooks like becoi a exteely vauabe seies

RB.May 998

archer et al cr essential readings 1998 bhaskar genl intro

Documents