{"title":"反自然主义与解释社会科学的结构","authors":"L. Wedeen","doi":"10.1080/08913811.2019.1730591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Mark Bevir and Jason Blakely’s Interpretive Social Science: An Anti-Naturalist Approach successfully points out the problems with various forms of philosophical naturalism, demonstrating how essentialism, synchrony, and an effort to establish lawlike generalizations bedevil social science on both sides of the interpretive/positivist divide. The authors do an excellent job of identifying the philosophical roots and debates that are tied to the interpretive turn, while offering a thought-provoking critique of Michel Foucault. However, Bevir and Blakely overstate the degree to which Foucault’s work succumbs to forms of naturalism more typical of empiricist social science. Although this is certainly a problem in Foucault’s work, the book too readily dismisses his important analysis of deep social structures, which cannot be reduced to individuals’ ideas. Interpretive Social Science also overlooks relevant debates in feminist theory and existing criticisms of political culturalism, raising questions about the book’s intended audience.","PeriodicalId":51723,"journal":{"name":"Critical Review","volume":"31 1","pages":"481 - 488"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08913811.2019.1730591","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anti-Naturalism and Structure in Interpretive Social Science\",\"authors\":\"L. Wedeen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08913811.2019.1730591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Mark Bevir and Jason Blakely’s Interpretive Social Science: An Anti-Naturalist Approach successfully points out the problems with various forms of philosophical naturalism, demonstrating how essentialism, synchrony, and an effort to establish lawlike generalizations bedevil social science on both sides of the interpretive/positivist divide. The authors do an excellent job of identifying the philosophical roots and debates that are tied to the interpretive turn, while offering a thought-provoking critique of Michel Foucault. However, Bevir and Blakely overstate the degree to which Foucault’s work succumbs to forms of naturalism more typical of empiricist social science. Although this is certainly a problem in Foucault’s work, the book too readily dismisses his important analysis of deep social structures, which cannot be reduced to individuals’ ideas. Interpretive Social Science also overlooks relevant debates in feminist theory and existing criticisms of political culturalism, raising questions about the book’s intended audience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51723,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Review\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"481 - 488\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08913811.2019.1730591\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2019.1730591\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2019.1730591","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Anti-Naturalism and Structure in Interpretive Social Science
ABSTRACT Mark Bevir and Jason Blakely’s Interpretive Social Science: An Anti-Naturalist Approach successfully points out the problems with various forms of philosophical naturalism, demonstrating how essentialism, synchrony, and an effort to establish lawlike generalizations bedevil social science on both sides of the interpretive/positivist divide. The authors do an excellent job of identifying the philosophical roots and debates that are tied to the interpretive turn, while offering a thought-provoking critique of Michel Foucault. However, Bevir and Blakely overstate the degree to which Foucault’s work succumbs to forms of naturalism more typical of empiricist social science. Although this is certainly a problem in Foucault’s work, the book too readily dismisses his important analysis of deep social structures, which cannot be reduced to individuals’ ideas. Interpretive Social Science also overlooks relevant debates in feminist theory and existing criticisms of political culturalism, raising questions about the book’s intended audience.
期刊介绍:
Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society is a political-science journal dedicated to advancing political theory with an epistemological bent. Recurrent questions discussed in our pages include: How can political actors know what they need to know to effect positive social change? What are the sources of political actors’ beliefs? Are these sources reliable? Critical Review is the only journal in which the ideational determinants of political behavior are investigated empirically as well as being assessed for their normative implications. Thus, while normative political theorists are the main contributors to Critical Review, we also publish scholarship on the realities of public opinion, the media, technocratic decision making, ideological reasoning, and other empirical phenomena.