Abstract
It has frequently been argued that there must be a necessary and important difference between the methods of the natural and social sciences, or that an empirical method in social science must be supplemented by or is inferior to an interpretative method. Often these claims have been supported by arguments using premises derived from the early Heidegger or the late Wittgenstein. These arguments, in turn, tend either to be transcendental in form or to follow a hermeneutic argument strategy. This paper argues that neither of these types of argument, based on Heideggerian or Wittgensteinian premises, can be used successfully to show an important or essential difference between natural and social science. It does this by examining arguments proposed by Peter Winch and Hubert Dreyfus, showing how they are fallacious and misconstrue the import of the premises upon which they are based, and generalizing these objections to the transcendental and hermeneutic styles of argument in this field as such. The paper concludes with a consideration of Richard Rorty's Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, which reaches conclusions in this area which are similar to those of this paper but which, it is argued, misconstrues the character of its own argument
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/00201748408602013
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 56,949
External links

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

Interpretation and the Sciences of Man.Charles Taylor - 1971 - Review of Metaphysics 25 (1):3 - 51.
Interpretation and the Sciences of Man.Charles Taylor - 1971 - Review of Metaphysics 25 (1):3-51.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Iv. Understanding Peter Winch.W. W. Sharrock & R. J. Anderson - 1985 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 28 (1-4):119 – 122.
Gadamer, Rorty, Hermeneutics, and Truth: A Response to Warnke.Donald Rothberg - 1986 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 29 (1-4):355-361.
Science, Practice and Politics.Steven Vogel - 1991 - Social Epistemology 5 (4):267 – 292.
A Pragmatic Reconstruction of the Naturalism/Anti-Naturalism Debate.William M. Throop & Martha L. Knight - 1987 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 17 (1):93–112.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Transcendental Arguments: A Plea for Modesty.Robert Stern - 2007 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 74 (1):143-161.
Habermas and Transcendental Arguments: A Reappraisal.Michael Power - 1993 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 23 (1):26-49.
The Scope of Hermeneutics in Natural Science.Patrick A. Heelan - 1998 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 29 (2):273-298.
Hermeneneutics and the Social Sciences: A Gadamerian Critique of Rorty.Georgia Warnke - 1985 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 28 (1-4):339 – 357.
Recent Reinterpretations of the Transcendental.Sami Pihlstr - 2004 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 47 (3):289 – 314.
Recent Reinterpretations of the Transcendental.Sami Pihlström - 2004 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 47 (3):289-314.
Karl Popper's Political Philosophy of Social Science.Geoff Stokes - 1997 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 27 (1):56-79.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-30

Total views
38 ( #267,466 of 2,409,980 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #541,494 of 2,409,980 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes