The Relevance of Ontological Commitments in Social Sciences: Realist and Pragmatist Viewpoints

Kivinen, Osmo; Piiroinen, Tero

doi:10.1111/j.0021-8308.2004.00246.x

Cited by 43 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Appreciating this relationality and determined to avoid all dualisms or philosophical dichotomies inherent in intrinsic naturalism, it befits pragmatists to adopt the standpoint of methodological relationalism (Kivinen & Piiroinen, 2004, 2006). It goes nicely together with the idea of niche construction, whereas non‐relational, dichotomous thinking stands in the way of understanding how the development of organisms in their environment and the developments of those environments produced by organisms are both evolutionarily consequential and also intertwined and dependent on each other; “dichotomous thinking is undermined by niche construction” (Laland et al., 2008, p. 553).…”

Section: Niche Construction and Pragmatist Methodological Relationalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Distinctively Human: Two Perspectives on the Evolution of Language and Conscious Mind

Kivinen¹,

Piiroinen²

2011

J Theory Soc Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

there is an urgent need for a new branch of philosophy, "Philosophy of Society," which would consist of social ontology-meaning conceptual analysis of the logical structure of society, not traditional "metaphysical ontology" (Searle, 2010, pp. 3-6). Philosophy of Society would revolve around the trinity of human society, language and consciousness, trying to explicate the interrelations between them-or, as Searle (1998, p. ix) puts it, the logic of how they all hang together. 1 Searle's explication of the logic of this trinity starts with the emergence of intrinsic intentionality and consciousness from the biological brain, explains language as a natural outgrowth of that consciousness, and concludes with the mechanisms of social institutions and "the foundation for all institutional ontology" being created by language-use (e.g., Searle, 2010, pp. 61-63).In this paper we will scrutinize "intrinsic naturalism" as developed by Searle and other external realists such as Noam Chomsky, and contrast it with another type of naturalistic approach, one which leans heavily on a conception of evolution such that takes into account the variety of different and constantly diversifying ecological niches. 2 By the same token at issue here is the contrast between two methodological standpoints: subject-object dualism and methodological relationalism. We will focus specifically on the relationship between language and consciousness from a sociological angle; that relationship is a key philosophical theme in many intrinsic naturalistic accounts, but also an area of interest where a sociological version of niche-construction approach can be fruitfully applied. SEARLE'S ACCOUNT OF "HOW IT ALL HANGS TOGETHER"Searle's explanation of how consciousness, language and society all relate to each other is a naturalistic endeavour such that honours "the Enlightenment vision" of external realism where the objective nature of the universe exists independently from our subjective minds but can be (partially) comprehended by those minds.

show abstract

Section: Niche Construction and Pragmatist Methodological Relationalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Distinctively Human: Two Perspectives on the Evolution of Language and Conscious Mind

Kivinen¹,

Piiroinen²

2011

J Theory Soc Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to them, efforts to understand all knowledge including philosophical ontology are social affair. Kivinen and Piiroinen(2004;, have pointed out that claims to provide ontological foundations to social sciences, coupled with "realist" attitude philosophy, are no longer sufficient. Their point of departure is "evolutioniary niches" with Darwinian approach and "theory of pragmatist action" from Dewey.…”

Section: Winds From Europe III : Okivinen and T Piiroinen And Nichmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Road Map for Applying Relational Sociology

Kasapoğlu

2019

ASSRJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relational sociology is based on the French and the German who first came to mind. It is important to note that Bourdieu and Elias are an introduction to relational sociology, although in the last 30 years different opinions or voices have been heard from America and Europe. For this purpose, following the process-based sociology of Bourdieu and Elias, Kivinen and Piiroinen (2013) were given to emphasize epistemology rather than ontology and to make it clear from metaphysical consideration. On the other hand, the work of White and his colleagues (2013) was handled in detail to represent relational sociological studies in the United States. As a result, the theoretical foundations of relational sociology under the metaphorical titles of three from Europe and one from America were tried to be explained in detail. In the conclusion part, relational sociology was made clear with some tables. 449discussing intellectual opposition such as positivism and interpretivist sociology. The most important thing that emerges in this fruitful talk and argument is the formation of a network of relationships to understand dynamic social processes rather than a single or original theory. Because until the 1990s, the dominant positivist understanding in network analysis was neglecting the interpretation and construction of meaning as it was far from the concept of cultural richness because of the heavy influence of the mathematical direction.On the other hand, The American Sociological Association's (ASA), the formerly marginalized cultural section, is also beginning to expand and in the mid-2000s, "cultural sociology" studiesthis area, which often overlaps with subfields such as political sociology, comparative historical studies, social movements and collective behaviour-becomes the most sophisticated field of study. The relation-network analyses of important sociologists such as Bearman (1993), Mohr(1994) and Erikson(1996) that pioneer the understanding of cultural and historical processes draw attention .For relational sociology, "New School for Social Research" in New York and C. Tilly and then M. Emirbayer sociologists were the first to come to mind. Because in the 1980s the university administration employed famous thinkers such as C. Tilly and E. Hobsbawm, allowing intensive discussions between critical theorists, structuralists and post-structuralists to create new approaches. Indeed, in this productive environment, C. Tilly came to a synthesis called "relational realism" by observing his current views on identity, narrative and discourse. M. Emirbayer, who later became an assistant professor to the New School in 1991 and was interested in the interpretivist sociological tradition while working at Harvard University theManifesto of Relational Sociology is written by him in 1997. PREVAILING WINDS FROM EUROPE 1 : P.BOURDIEU AND RELATIONAL SOCIOLOGYBourdieu, as a sociologist, although he has a lot of followers, has not escaped the target of criticism. When Bourdieu is assessed in relation to relational sociology in this subs...

show abstract

“…By privileging ontology and rejecting any a priori limitations on what we can know about the world, Scientific 24 Critical Realism features prominently in IR endorsements of Scientific Realism. See: Ruse (1981), Gunnell (1995), Kivinen and Piiroinen (2004). Proponents of Critical Realism, who draw on the philosopher Roy Bhaskar, might object to the claim that they, like scientific realists more generally, rely on a correspondence theory of truth.…”

Section: The Three Main Foundational Positionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

IR and the false promise of philosophical foundations

Monteiro

Ruby

2009

Int Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International Relations (IR) is uneasy about its status as a 'science'. Throughout a long history of attempts to legitimate the field as 'scientific', IR scholars have imported multifarious positions from the Philosophy of Science (PoS) in order to ground IR on an unshakable foundation. Alas, no such unshakable foundation exists. The PoS is itself a contested field of study, in which no consensus exists on the proper foundation for science. By importing foundational divisions into IR, the 'science' debate splits the discipline into contending factions and justifies the absence of dialogue between them. As all foundations require a leap of faith, imperial foundational projects are always vulnerable to challenge and therefore unable to resolve the science question in IR. In this article, we seek to dissolve rather than solve the 'science' debate in IR and the quest for philosophical foundations. We argue that IR scholars should adopt an 'attitude towards' rather than a 'position in' the irresolvable foundational debate. Specifically, we advocate an attitude of 'foundational prudence' that is open-minded about what the PoS can offer IR, while precluding imperial foundational projects, which attempt to impose a single meta-theoretical framework on the discipline. This requires knowing what PoS arguments can and cannot do. As such, foundational prudence is post-foundational rather than anti-foundational. A prudent attitude towards philosophical foundations encourages theoretical and methodological pluralism, making room for a question-driven IR while de-escalating intradisciplinary politics.

show abstract

The Relevance of Ontological Commitments in Social Sciences: Realist and Pragmatist Viewpoints

Cited by 43 publications

References 30 publications

On the Distinctively Human: Two Perspectives on the Evolution of Language and Conscious Mind

On the Distinctively Human: Two Perspectives on the Evolution of Language and Conscious Mind

A Road Map for Applying Relational Sociology

IR and the false promise of philosophical foundations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About