David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Epistemology 18 (2-3):109-122 (2004)
By presenting a number of concrete examples, this paper aims at soliciting a reflection on how social phenomena become the ?objects of a science? by being classified in specific ways, to answer specific questions, in different social sciences. This is in view of arguing that the objectivity of the procedures by which social scientific objects are identified and classified can only be assessed in relation to the actual questions addressed and formulated about these objects ? rather than by referring back to some ideal standard or protocol of objective inquiry. This also goes against the practice, often endorsed by social scientific literature, of fixing a model for what social objects are to be like (scientific or philosophical, under some description or other) and the distortingly ?normative? idea of social scientific objectivity which derives from such practice. The objects of social scientific inquiry are complex in a specific sense, and a plural identification of those objects in the context of the widest array of methods of description, classification and analysis is to be pursued
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
William Outhwaite (2000). The Philosophy of Social Science. In Bryan S. Turner (ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Theory. Blackwell Publishers 47--70.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
E. Montuschi (2004). Rethinking Objectivity in Social Science. Social Epistemology 18 (2 & 3):109 – 122.
Peter Railton (1984). Marx and the Objectivity of Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:813 - 826.
H. E. Longino (1983). Scientific Objectivity and the Logics of Science. Inquiry 26 (1):85 – 106.
Matt L. Drabek (2010). Interactive Classification and Practice in the Social Sciences. Poroi 6 (2):62-80.
Malcolm Williams (2006). Can Scientists Be Objective? Social Epistemology 20 (2):163 – 180.
Sandra G. Harding (1978). Four Contributions Values Can Make to the Objectivity of Social Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1978:199 - 209.
Geoff Stokes (1997). Karl Popper's Political Philosophy of Social Science. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 27 (1):56-79.
Brian Fay (2006). For Science in the Social Sciences. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 36 (2):227-240.
Paul Seabright (1988). Objectivity, Disagreement, and Projectibility. Inquiry 31 (1):25 – 51.
Joseph Becker (1993). The Essential Nature of the Method of the Natural Sciences: Response to A. T. Nuyen's "Truth, Method, and Objectivity: Husserl and Gadamer on Scientific Method". Philosophy of the Social Sciences 23 (1):73-76.
Kareem Khalifa (2010). Social Constructivism and the Aims of Science. Social Epistemology 24 (1):45 – 61.
Warren Schmaus (1992). Sociology and Hacking's Trousers. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:167 - 173.
C. Mantzavinos (ed.) (2009). Philosophy of the Social Sciences: Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads26 ( #148,263 of 1,902,069 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #346,254 of 1,902,069 )
How can I increase my downloads?