The politics of modern thought and science

Epistemology should be the axe that breaks the ice of a traditionalism that covers and obstructs scientific enlightenment. This book explores the arguments between critical theory and epistemology in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Focusing on the first and second generations of critical theorists and Luhmann's systems theory, it examines how each approaches epistemology. The book offers a critique of the Kantian base of critical theory's epistemology in conjunction with the latter's endeavour to define political potential through the social function of science. The concept of dialectics is explored as the negation of the irrational and, furthermore, as the open field of epistemological conflict between rationality and irrationality. The book traces the course of arguments that begin with Dilthey's philosophy of a rigorous science, develop with Husserl's phenomenology, Simmel's and Weber's interest in the scientific element within the social concerns of scientific advance. In structuralism, the fear of dialogue prevails. The book discusses the epistemological thought of Pierre Bourdieu and Gilles Deleuze in terms of their persistence in constructing an epistemological understanding of social practice free from the burdens of dialectics, reason and rationality. It also enquires into issues of normativity and modernity within a comparative perspective on modernism, postmodernism and critical theory. Whether in relation to communication deriving from the threefold schema of utterance- information- understanding or in relation to self- reflexivity, systems theory fails to define the bearer or the actor of the previous structural processes. Critical realism attempted to ground dialectics in realism.

Anastasia Marinopoulou

relate to a phenomenological perspective on the sciences that intends to reveal a more rigorous science, which is achieved either a priori, as in Husserl, or a posteriori, as in ethnomethodology. Furthermore, structuralism emphasizes the relations of structural elements within a systemic formation, be that of a social, political or scientific nature. Such systemic structures, which remind us of the Luhmannian systems’ analysis, are achieved either empirically (according to structuralism), or cognitively (according to poststructuralism). But such structures are

in Critical theory and epistemology
Anastasia Marinopoulou

arguments that begin with Dilthey’s philosophy of a rigorous science, develop with Husserl’s phenomenology, Simmel’s and Weber’s interest in the scientific element within the social, and conclude with the ethnomethodological concerns on the everyday as a method of scientific advance. Phenomenology: Husserl, his predecessors and the epigones The pivotal consideration of the chapter can be mostly inferred from the implications of the German language that were so meticulously presented by Immanuel Kant in his renowned essay on the Enlightenment. The German  2 0 20

in Critical theory and epistemology
Abstract only
Derek Robbins

that phenomenologists saw themselves as continuously advancing positions based on observation in defiance of systematization. This meant that philosophy must not only be grasped ‘from the outside’ but worked through internally ‘as problem, genesis, give-and-take movement of thought’ (Lyotard, 1999 [1954], 3; 1991, 31). For Husserl, this was a quest for objectivity, for ‘philosophy as rigorous science’,4 even though it ran the risk of appearing to ‘lean in favour of a simplistic subjectivism’ (Lyotard, 1999 [1954], 3; 1991, 31). Husserl wanted to trace ‘all knowledge

in The Bourdieu paradigm
Open Access (free)
Managing overflow in science publishing
Sabina Siebert, Robert Insall and Laura M. Machesky

tale of hegemony and a struggle of survival in the world that favors the established hierarchies of science. The perspective of some of our interviewees leans toward maintaining the status quo – welcoming the newcomers but worrying about their legitimacy. Others, from journals based on new models of publishing founded on sound rigorous science and fair transparent treatment of authors, have a more optimistic outlook geared toward More means less 149 changing the system and breaking away from a heavy dependence on journal brands and impact factors. Initiatives such

in Overwhelmed by overflows?
Alexander Spencer

false version of history (White 1973). Within the discipline of history this suggestion was met with much scepticism and hostility as narratives were considered non-scientific and had the potential of undermining the reputation of history as a rigorous science in pursuit of unmasking the truth about what really happened (Korhonen 2006: 15; White 1978: 82; White 1987: 168). ‘“Narrative history” represented everything that social science history was not: it was soft rather than hard, impressionistic rather than rigorous, and literary rather than scientific’ (Sewell 1992

in Romantic narratives in international politics
Derek Robbins

presupposition. Implicitly, the question was whether phenomenological research should be thought to be denying accumulated wisdom in order to generate a new kind of rigorous science. Although Merleau-Ponty poses this question, which potentially challenges the whole tradition of Western philosophical thought and also his personal initiation into its language, he responds, in La structure du comportement, with a final chapter which exploits his formation to examine in detail the legacy of that tradition in respect to the discourse about the mind and body. His summary of

in The Bourdieu paradigm
Abstract only
Derek Robbins

between the logic of scientific discovery and the rhetoric of its communication, between rigorous science and popular transmission,19 a tension which was to become acute in the coming decades when his texts began to be translated into other languages, particularly English. Bourdieu confronts this problem head-on in the opening paragraph of Appendix 1 of La distinction, entitled ‘Quelques reflexions sur la méthode’ [some reflections on the method], but this is only a reproduction, now relegated to a methodological appendix, of the text which had constituted the

in The Bourdieu paradigm
Open Access (free)
M. Anne Brown

rigorous science or indeed religious training impossible. Language can be understood as having representational, expressive and other functions and manners, without constituting it as the medium through which distinct domains of being are aligned. Rejecting such epistemology is rather to step aside from a quite particular spectrum of ways by which ultimate guarantees that we are right in what we know is sought. The classical epistemologies enable a range of philosophical moves that become untenable once the tripartite epistemological structure is

in Human rights and the borders of suffering