Critical Realism and the Limits of Philosophy

Abstract

This article critiques the idea that, by establishing a general framework within which research must be conducted, philosophical argument can ‘take the lead’ in relation to research. It develops Holmwood’s work in this area by examining the ontological arguments put forward by critical realists, which attempt to establish the fundamental characteristics of the social realm prior to the production of empirically successful research in that realm. The article draws on a contrast with ontological argument in the natural sciences to demonstrate the illegitimacy of this manoeuvre, showing that ontological claims can be given some justification, but only when they are derived from research that is widely held to be empirically successful. Realist ontological claims in the social sciences do not have this basis, and it is argued that Bhaskar’s alternative mode of justification for these claims is unconvincing. Archer’s view is also criticized that critical realist arguments should be given a strong regulatory role in relation to research, illustrating the problems with this by critiquing Cruickshank’s ontologically driven analysis of unemployment and the underclass. The article concludes that social scientific research should be conducted without philosophical legislation.

Generating Generative Mechanisms

“…4 Collier 1994. 5 Kemp 2005. There may be a difference between 'legislating' and 'underlabouring' by providing an orientating metaframework.…”

“…There may be a difference between 'legislating' and 'underlabouring' by providing an orientating metaframework. 6 Kemp 2005. 7 Yeung 1997.…”

Contribuições do diálogo entre o realismo crítico e o construcionismo social para os estudos organizacionais

“…Pelas reflexões e argumentações de Bhaskar (2000), Fleetwood (2005), Kemp (2005), Reed (2005) de realidade, considerando tanto as estruturas ou mecanismos mais profundos que definem eventos, como as regularidades no domínio mais superficial da realidade. Segundo, Reed (2005) afirma que essas estruturas não são diretamente acessíveis à experiência e devem ser teoricamente construídas e formuladas por meio da abstração conceitual e retrodução.…”

“…Nesse cenário, podem ser observadas iniciativas para se compreender as diversas possibilidades de pensamentos referenciais e de posturas ontológicas e epistemológicas formuladas no âmbito da filosofia das ciências e da sociologia do conhecimento, e que foram apropriadas pelos pesquisadores do campo da administração e dos estudos organizacionais. Essa diversidade apresenta amplo escopo, englobando desde perspectivas fundamentadas no positivismo (SILVINO, 2007;BRANDÃO, 2011), passando pelo interpretativismo (VERGARA e CALDAS, 2005), pela abordagem crítica (FARIA, 2009), pelo pós-modernismo (SOUZA, 2012), pelo pragmatismo (BAERT, 2005;MENEGHETTI, 2007;HOLMWOOD, 2011), pela hermenêutica (PRASAD, 2002;ROBERGE, 2011), pela abordagem da complexidade (FRANCELIN, 2005; SERVA, DIAS e ALPERSTEDT, 2010), pelo construcionismo (GERGEN, 1985;SOUZA FILHO, 2007), pelo realismo crítico (HAMLIN, 2000;FLEETWOOD, 2005;HUNT, 2005;KEMP, 2005), dentre outras. Essa pluralidade, além de refletir a variedade de posicionamentos epistemológicos e ontológicos dos pesquisadores da área, também evidencia desafios associados ao processo de apreensão de diferentes fenômenos sociais e organizacionais.…”

Relational Thinking: A Critique of Co-Deterministic Theories of Structure and Agency

“…We must see the social reality as based on the constant inter‐actions between “human beings” and the structured “world.” It just seems inevitable and logical to Archer to study relations between structure and agency since these two concepts have to be seen as a strata of reality that have their own power or “properties.” In this sense, her co‐determinism appears to be an epistemological necessity. As S. Kemp (2005) explained, R. Bhaskar and M. Archer presume that fundamental characteristics of the social realm can be deduced from, or depend on, some philosophical/epistemological discussions.…”