Virgil G. HinshawJr. Epistemological relativism and the sociology of knowledge. Philosophy of science, vol. 15 (1948), pp. 4–10.

1950 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-73
Author(s):  
G. D. W. Berry
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Epistemological Relativism

Positivism, Historicism, and Political Inquiry

1972 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 796-817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugene F. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Theory Of Knowledge ◽  
General Nature ◽  
Past Century ◽  
The Past ◽  
Political Inquiry ◽  
Epistemological Position ◽  
Epistemological Relativism

The present controversy between “behavioral” and “postbehavioral” views of political inquiry reflects a larger dispute between two opposing theories of knowledge. Whereas the behavioral movement has its epistemological roots in positivism and, ultimately, in classical British empiricism, the most recent protest against behavioralism draws upon the theory of knowledge that has been the principal foe of empiricism over the past century. This theory of knowledge, which received the name “historicism” shortly after its emergence, had become the dominant epistemological position by the mid-twentieth century. This essay considers the general nature of historicism and its influence on the recent revolt against positivism in the philosophy of science. Finally, it examines the use that political scientists have made of historicist principles in opposing positivistic models of political inquiry. It argues that an epistemological relativism becomes unavoidable once certain premises of historicism are embraced.

International Relations as a Social Science

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie D'Aoust
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Historical Development ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Science History ◽  
American Social Science ◽  
Scientific Legitimacy ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Definition Of

The nature of the debates surrounding international relations (IR) as a social science have pointed to issues of ontology, epistemology, methodology, philosophy of science, history, and sociology of knowledge, yet they are all crucial in understanding the character of international relations. Such an idea was brought about by Stanley Hoffman’s 1977 article, “An American Social Science: International Relations.” For Hoffmann, IR developed the way it did out of a set of distinctive intellectual predispositions, political circumstances, and institutional opportunities. His insights, however controversial, thus reveal fundamental questions about the work of IR scholars. The key issues here are the definition of IR as a discipline, the definition of IR as a science, and the definition of IR as an American social science in particular. The large variety of inquiries explored in IR, the “kind” of social science IR scholars are engaged in, as well as how “progress” is assessed, all reveal some important nuances in international relations as a discipline. Moreover, the debates surrounding the scientific legitimacy of IR scholarship reveal how IR gained legitimacy as a discipline. The historical development of IR could in fact be described as a series of debates, known among those in the field as the “great debates,” which eventually became the coherent whole understood to be the field of international relations.

IR As a Social Science/IR As an American Social Science

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie D'Aoust
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Historical Development ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Science History ◽  
American Social Science ◽  
Scientific Legitimacy ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Definition Of

The nature of the debates surrounding international relations (IR) as a social science have pointed to issues of ontology, epistemology, methodology, philosophy of science, history, and sociology of knowledge, yet they are all crucial in understanding the character of international relations. Such an idea was brought about by Stanley Hoffman’s 1977 article, “An American Social Science: International Relations.” For Hoffmann, IR developed the way it did out of a set of distinctive intellectual predispositions, political circumstances, and institutional opportunities. His insights, however controversial, thus reveal fundamental questions about the work of IR scholars. The key issues here are the definition of IR as a discipline, the definition of IR as a science, and the definition of IR as an American social science in particular. The large variety of inquiries explored in IR, the “kind” of social science IR scholars are engaged in, as well as how “progress” is assessed, all reveal some important nuances in international relations as a discipline. Moreover, the debates surrounding the scientific legitimacy of IR scholarship reveal how IR gained legitimacy as a discipline. The historical development of IR could in fact be described as a series of debates, known among those in the field as the “great debates,” which eventually became the coherent whole understood to be the field of international relations.

scholarly journals Keynes, Kuhn and the sociology of knowledge: a comment on Pernecky and Wojick

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 1415-1424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rod Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Critical Philosophy ◽  
Critical Rationalism ◽  
Knowledge Function ◽  
Philosophy Of Knowledge

Abstract Mark Pernecky and Paul Wojick use T.S. Kuhn’s philosophy of science to diagnose The problematic nature and consequences of the effort to force Keynes into the conceptual cul-de-sac of Walrasian economics. But their diagnosis is itself problematical in nature and consequence. It assumes the virtues of a pre-Kuhnian philosophy of knowledge that the Kuhnian meta-framework overtly discards. One way to eliminate the inconsistency is to recognise that Kuhn’s philosophy of science and sociology of knowledge function to immunise theories from criticism. Anyone who wishes to embrace a sociologically more critical philosophy ought to consider instead the philosophical attitude of critical rationalism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document