![]() The second is whether the eighty years of research into this sub-field provides a sufficient basis for drawing well corroborated inferences about its characteristics, and if so, what substantive conclusions can be drawn from them. The first question is whether the intellectual history of this particularly extensive and intensive cross-disciplinary sub-field of social and political psychology bears any significant relationship to Thomas Kuhn’s account of scientific revolutions, and if so, to what extent. This paper addresses three questions about psychological authoritarianism via a critical discussion of key texts in the literature. ![]() A closer look at Bohm's philosophical commitments highlights the ways in which his theory of quantum mechanics is non-classical and does not offer a way to avoid all 'quantum weirdness'. In particular, I argue that Bohm was never strongly committed to determinism and was a realist in some ways but not in others. I reject the idea that Bohm's early work can be described as mechanist, determinist, and realist, in contrast to his later writings, and argue that there is in fact a strong continuity between his work on quantum mechanics from the early 1950s and his later, more speculative writings. This paper aims to explain this discrepancy between the ways in which Bohm's work on quantum mechanics has been received and the way in which Bohm himself presented it. In later years, he moved more and more towards speculative and mystical directions. In response, Bohm emphasized the progressiveness of his approach, and even turned the accusation of classicality around by arguing that he wanted to move beyond classical elements still inherent in orthodox quantum mechanics. This framework encourages middle-range or typological theorizing about combinations of causal mechanisms and their operation in recurrent contexts, and it offers a means of reinvigorating the dialogue between International Relations, the other subfields of political science, and the rest of the social sciences.When David Bohm published his alternative theory of quantum mechanics in 1952, it was not received well a recurring criticism was that it formed a reactionary attempt to return to classical physics. I Introduce a 'taxonomy of theories about causal mechanisms' as a structured pluralist framework for encompassing the theories about mechanisms of power, institutions, and legitimacy that have been providing the explanatory content of the isms all along. Yet in order to transform the practice of International Relations theorizing and research, calls for 'analytic eclecticism' must not only demonstrate that scientific realism is a defensible epistemology amenable to diverse methods they must provide a structured and memorable framework for diverse and cumulative theorizing and research, field-wide discourse, and compelling pedagogy. ![]() A promising alternative is to build on the philosophical foundation of scientific realism and orient International Relations theorizing around the idea of explanation via reference to hypothesized causal mechanisms. Theorizing under the rubric of paradigmatic 'isms' has made important conceptual contributions to International Relations, but the organization of the subfield around these isms is based on flawed readings of the philosophy of science and has run its course. Finally, Kuhn's argument on incommensurability of competing paradigms and the problem of objectivity are also discussed in order to show the problematic aspects of the concept. ![]() It is showed that the process of paradigm change, for Kuhn, leads to a scientific revolution. It is debated that the term could globally be understood as a disciplinary matrix in a sociological context whereas the term particularly refers to the concrete puzzle solutions which could be seen as exemplars of good science. Thus, this study aims to analyze Kuhn's concept of paradigm as an intellectual framework which makes research possible. For him, such regularity in the development of various sciences is a paradigm which he thought to be a general feature of science. His idea that the development of science has periods of stable growth punctuated by the scientific revolutions is based on the cycle of normal science, crisis, and revolution. After having published The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn's contribution has not only been a break with several key positivist doctrines but also triggered the growth of a new academic discipline – the sociology of science. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |