Philosophy of the Social Sciences 35 (1):20-49 (2005)
|Abstract||This article discusses explanatory theories of normative concepts and argues for a set of criteria of adequacy by which such theories may be evaluated. The criteria offered fall into four categories: ontological, theoretical, pragmatic, and moral. After defending the criteria and discussing their relative weighting, this article uses them to prune the set of available explanatory theories of oppression. Functionalist theories, including Hegelian recognition theory and Foucauldian social theory, are rejected, as are psychoanalytic theory and social dominance theory. Finally, the article defends structural rational choice theory as the most promising methodology for explaining oppression. Key Words: oppression explanation rational choice theory.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
James W. McAllister (1993). Scientific Realism and the Criteria for Theory-Choice. Erkenntnis 38 (2):203 - 222.
Dennis Chong (1995). Rational Choice Theory's Mysterious Rivals. Critical Review 9 (1-2):37-57.
Brown Grier (1975). Prediction, Explanation, and Testability as Criteria for Judging Statistical Theories. Philosophy of Science 42 (4):373-383.
B. C. Postow (1999). Reasons for Action: Toward a Normative Theory and Meta-Level Criteria. Kluwer Academic.
Petros A. M. Gelepithis (2003). Criteria and Evaluation of Cognitive Theories. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):607-609.
E. C. Barnes (2002). The Miraculous Choice Argument for Realism. Philosophical Studies 111 (2):97 - 120.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads62 ( #18,254 of 722,744 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,247 of 722,744 )
How can I increase my downloads?