Methodology
Rahman Sharifzadeh
Abstract
The book “After Method; Mess in Social Science Research” written by English philosopher and sociologist John Law, is one of the few books which explores the method itself philosophically-sociologically. After Method explores and challenges the metaphysical assumptions and normativities of ...
Read More
The book “After Method; Mess in Social Science Research” written by English philosopher and sociologist John Law, is one of the few books which explores the method itself philosophically-sociologically. After Method explores and challenges the metaphysical assumptions and normativities of conventional methods and tries to provide an alternative approach toward method. The book also rethinks practices, purposes, and expression techniques of conventional methods through a variety of case studies. This book advances the discussion in the space of constructivism and actor-network theory; however, in the author's opinion, it goes beyond these two in several places, particularly in the discussions related to indefiniteness and multiplicity. In this article, we will lay out the most important claims and positions of this book and discuss also some of its shortcomings.
Methodology
Rahman Sharifzadeh
Abstract
Roger Trigg’s Understanding Social Science does a good job of criticizing positivist and deterministic approaches to social science, either biological, social, or psychological. In the context of critical realism, Trigg criticizes in a good and detailed way many of the common dichotomies, ...
Read More
Roger Trigg’s Understanding Social Science does a good job of criticizing positivist and deterministic approaches to social science, either biological, social, or psychological. In the context of critical realism, Trigg criticizes in a good and detailed way many of the common dichotomies, amongst which naive realism / non-realism is most important. Although Trigg attempts to go away from positivistic and non-critical methodologies, and in result opens up a way for rational evaluation and judgment, as we shall see, he does not develop his methodology very well; moreover, his understanding of what society is and what social structures and realities are made of may endanger the empirical aspect of his methodology. Furthermore, it seems to me that some of Trigg’s arguments in the field of rationality are ambiguous and do not go far enough in the critique of constructivists’ and relativists’ attitudes.
