Epistemology and Social Science
Social sciences, as all sciences, have their own epistemology,
methodology and philosophy. Epistemology is the study of the
foundations of knowledge and philosophy is the theoretical background
of each science. There have been many criticisms about the substance
of the social sciences especially from the positivists. They try all
the time to convince everybody that a science which has no rules and
natural laws can not be called ‘science’.
Epistemology and philosophy function as repulsion to the attempts of
the positivists. They help us to understand and explain that social
sciences are not natural sciences with inviolable laws; nevertheless
they are a different kind of science that is based on a theoretical
background and have to do with human behavior and reaction that can
not be determined by any rule.
Additionally, in the study of International Relations that is a part
of the social sciences the situation is about the same. In which way
and in what extend epistemology and philosophy of the social sciences
help us to understand the discipline of International Relations? This
is a question that will be answered in the continuity of this paper.
Epistemology of Social Sciences and International Relations
‘Epistemology is the technical term for the theory of knowledge’.[1]
Knowledge is a very important issue for someone who wants to
understand the study of social sciences. And a very clear way to
explain the theory of knowledge is to deal with the issue of
relativity that, for many social scientists, is the main issue in
their field.
Every social scientist has to keep in his mind that hi...
... middle of paper ...
...al Relations
Course Coordinators: Dr. Keith Webb and Dr. Mirbagheri Farid
Title: The Necessity of Epistemology and Philosophy of Social Sciences
to the Understanding of the Discipline of International Relations
Scheme: MA in International Relations
---------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Tend Benton and Ian Craib, Philosophy of Social Sciences: the
philosophical foundations of social thought
[2] Yongling Ding, My View on Social Science Research
[3] Clyde Higgins, Michael G. Richards, Individual, Family and
Community: An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Study of Contemporary
Life
[4] Tend Benton and Ian Craib, Philosophy of Social Sciences: the
philosophical foundations of social thought
[5] Alexandre Kirchberger, Marx, Ideology, and International Relations
I identify with being a white, Catholic, straight, teenager girl living in Owensboro, Kentucky. I considered those my cultural and societal groups. There is no objective way to pick my real group. With my taste, opinions, characteristics and age constantly changing so are my cultural and societal groups.
This essay starts with definition of traditional epistemology, followed by an explanation of how class, gender, and race can affect what one can know. Traditional epistemology can be defined as all knowers, regardless of who you are or what your social situation is, are bound by the same cognitive norms. (lecture) Charles Mills however, in the article “Alternative Epistemologies”, argues that who you are and your social situation change your access to knowledge. He criticizes that traditional epistemology fails to consider how an individual’s social situation can affect what he can know. Those in non-dominant social groups have epistemic access especially for knowing about oppression. In this essay I will attempt to explain Mills argument
The prominent scholar of Political Science, Kenneth N. Waltz, founder of neorealism, has proposed controversial realist theories in his work. Publications such as "Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis", "Theory of International Politics” and “The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate,” demonstrate how Waltz's approach was motivated by the American military power. In acquaintance of this fact, the purpose of this paper is to critically analyze Waltz theoretical argument from the journal "Structural Realism after the Cold War". Firstly, this paper will indicate the author's thesis and the arguments supporting it. Secondly, limitations found in theoretical arguments will be illustrated and thirdly, synergies between the author's thesis and this analysis will be exposed.
This meta-synthesis research analyzed 17 primary data sets to investigate the impact of a VCoP on the professional development of online instructors. The findings unveiled an interesting discernment of the faculty experiences and how learning through social constructivism can occur within a VCoP. Based on the research findings and 10 emergent themes, five overarching dimensions were compiled to synthesize and discuss the results further. These are (1) social nature of online learning; (2) faculty participation in a VCoP; (3) acquisition of knowledge and skills; (4) enhanced teaching and learning practices; and (5) overall impact of a VCoP on FPD. These overarching dimensions specifically accentuate on my theoretical framework, independent
Shadow work can be described as the various forms of labour that exist outside of the formal economy or within the informal economy. Social Science plays a major part in bringing attention to the dangers, harms and hardships experienced by the individuals working in the informal economy. Social scientists have recognised that facts don’t speak for themselves and often require analysis and interpretation to produce meaning. This is especially true when dealing with shadow work and thus social scientists have developed concepts, theories and values to aid analysis and interpretation of facts. A number of different concepts have been identified to assist the interpretation of facts on shadow work some of these are power, risk, social structure and agency. Although these concepts all attempt to interpret the facts on shadow work, their approaches and the results generated differ significantly. In this essay I will be comparing and contrasting these concepts by looking at how they are used in the course case studies to interpret facts on shadow work. I will be using the block method of essay writing as outlined in week 13.5.1 “structuring your essay”
Each of the four classical theorists Marx, Weber, Durkheim, and Simmel had different theories of the relationship between society and the individual. It is the objective of this paper to critically evaluate the sociological approaches of each theory to come to a better understanding of how each theorist perceived such a relationship and what it means for the nature of social reality.
Babbie, E. (2007) The Practice of Social Research. Thomson Higher Education. Belmont. (USA) Eleven Edition.
Truth and beliefs contribute in building the knowledge of a person. Cogent reasons for the beliefs convert the beliefs into knowledge. However, sometimes the beliefs are actually assumption, so they may be wrong. Truth is the facts known from different sources. Something can be considered as knowledge, only if it is true. The word epistemology refers to studying the source of knowledge. The epistemology helps in understanding the process of development of knowledge, sources of knowledge and makes distinctions between belief and actual truth. I critically examined and analyzed the origin and the process of acquiring the knowledge for the two essays I wrote earlier. One essay, an analytical one, was written on the subject of increasing prison population and improper justice system. The second essay was written on the subject of human resource management. To develop the knowledge and understanding I demonstrated in the essays, I had to search for resources, rationalize the information gained and evaluate it in conjunction with my personal beliefs.
The creation of the study of international relations in the early 20th century has allowed multiple political theories to be compared, contrasted, debated, and argued against one another for the past century. These theories were created based on certain understandings of human principles or social nature and project these concepts onto the international system. They examine the international political structure and thrive to predict or explain how states will react under certain situations, pressures, and threats. Two of the most popular theories are known as constructivism and realism. When compared, these theories are different in many ways and argue on a range of topics. The topics include the role of the individual and the use of empirical data or science to explain rationally. They also have different ideological approaches to political structure, political groups, and the idea that international relations are in an environment of anarchy.
People’s ideas and assumptions about world politics shape and construct the theories that help explain world conflicts and events. These assumptions can be classified into various known theoretical perspectives; the most dominant is political realism. Political realism is the most common theoretical approach when it is in means of foreign policy and international issues. It is known as “realpolitik” and emphasis that the most important actor in global politics is the state, which pursues self-interests, security, and growing power (Ray and Kaarbo 3). Realists generally suggest that interstate cooperation is severely limited by each state’s need to guarantee its own security in a global condition of anarchy. Political realist view international politics as a struggle for power dominated by organized violence, “All history shows that nations active in international politics are continuously preparing for, actively involved in, or recovering from organized violence in the form of war” (Kegley 94). The downside of the political realist perspective is that their emphasis on power and self-interest is their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states.
Realism is one of the important perspectives on global politics, it is a notion about the conservative society and political philosophy (Heywood 2011: 54; Shimko 2013: 36). Besides, Gilpin (1996) claims that “realism…, it is not a scientific theory that is subject to the test of falsifiability, therefore, cannot be proved and disproved.” (Frankel 1996: xiii). The components of the realist approach to international relations will be discussed.
The international system is an anarchical system which means that, unlike the states, there is no over ruling, governing body that enforces laws and regulations that all states must abide by. The International System in today’s society has become highly influential from a number of significant factors. Some of these factors that will be discussed are Power held by the state, major Wars that have been fought out in recent history and international organisations such as the U.N, NATO and the W.T.O. Each of these factors, have a great influence over the international system and as a result, the states abilities to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development”.
The discipline of sociology provides a perspective that allows for individuals to expand and dig beyond “common knowledge” and inherit an approach to society that allows an advanced analysis of the root cause of activity in a certain society, opposed to assessing it on an assumption. A beneficial component to sociology is that it can be individually directed to different components of society that all contribute to its overall functioning. Under a sociological perspective we can use an engaged approach that once applied to social issues can improve the functioning of societies on both local and global scales that are considered complex, degrading, or facing considerable amounts of neglect. When we take into consideration the environment and
The study of international relations takes a wide range of theoretical approaches. Some emerge from within the discipline itself others have been imported, in whole or in part, from disciplines such as economics or sociology. Indeed, few social scientific theories have not been applied to the study of relations amongst nations. Many theories of international relations are internally and externally contested, and few scholars believe only in one or another. In spite of this diversity, several major schools of thought are discernable, differentiated principally by the variables they emphasize on military power, material interests, or ideological beliefs. International Relations thinking have evolved in stages that are marked by specific debates between groups of scholars. The first major debate is between utopian liberalism and realism, the second debate is on method, between traditional approaches and behavioralism. The third debate is between neorealism/neoliberalism and neo-Marxism, and an emerging fourth debate is between established traditions and post-positivist alternatives (Jackson, 2007).
Social sciences are the analysis methodically of the social area of the world. They are mixed area of study of human behavior and society which include disciplines of anthropology, economics, political science, psychology and sociology. Social sciences study methodically the manner in which people behave and how they influence the world around us. It aims to comprehend any given social phenomena by using a methodology borrowed from the physical sciences. Natural sciences are the study of natural world. They use scientific method to study about nature and relate to everything else in nature such as the animals, earth, plants and etc. It covers topics such as physics, chemistry, and mathematics.