interpretivism
171551709
Interpretivism and norms
This article reconsiders the relationship between interpretivism about belief and normative standards. Interpretivists have traditionally taken beliefs (and thus veridicality conditions for belief attribution) to be fixed in relation to norms of interpretation. However, recent work by philosophers and psychologists reveals that human belief attribution practices are governed by a rich diversity of normative standards. Interpretivists thus face a dilemma: either give up on the idea that belief is constitutively normative or countenance a context sensitive disjunction of norms that constitute belief. Either way, interpretivists should embrace the intersubjective indeterminacy of belief.
Devin Sanchez Curry
213620420
Can Deflationism Save Interpretivism?
The aim of this paper is to show that the interpretivist account of propositional attitudes fails even at the most plausible reading that treats this theory as a version of the deflationary approach to existence coupled with a metaphysical claim about the judgement dependence of propositional attitudes. It will be argued that adopting a deflationary reading of interpretivism allows this theory to avoid the common charge of fictionalism, according to which interpretivists cannot maintain realism about attitudes as their theory becomes a covert form of mental fictionalism. However, as will be shown, the deflationary version of interpretivism faces a fatal dilemma: either it becomes indistinguishable from generic deflationism about the mental, or it must embrace the metaphysical thesis of judgement dependence of propositional attitudes. The latter option leads to unacceptable epistemological consequences, as it cannot accommodate intuitions about possibility of error in attribution of attitudes. Thus, it turns out that even a subtle version of interpretivism is not a viable theory of intentional states.
Krzysztof Poslajko
213277757
The English school and the classical approach: Between modernism and interpretivism
This article analyses the evolution of the English school's approach to international relations from the work of the early British Committee in the late 1950s and early 1960s to its revival in the 1990s and afterwards. It argues that the school's so called 'classical approach' was shaped by the crisis of developmental historicism brought on by the First World War and by the reactions of historians like Herbert Butterfield and Martin Wight to the rise of modernist social science in the twentieth century. It characterises the classical approach, as advanced by Hedley Bull, as a form of 'reluctant modernism' with underlying interpretivist commitments and unresolved tensions with modernist approaches. It argues that to resolve some of the confusion concerning its preferred approach to the study of international relations, the English school should return to the interpretivist commitments of its early thinkers.
Mark Bevir Ian Hall
225029283
Interpretivism without Judgement Dependence
In a recent article in this journal, Krzysztof Poslajko reconstructs and endorses as probative a dilemma for interpretivism first posed by Alex Byrne. On the first horn of the dilemma, the interpretivist takes attitudes to emerge in relation to an ideal interpreter (and thus loses any connection with actual folk psychological practices) On the second horn, the interpretivist takes attitudes to emerge in relation to individuals' judgements (and thus denies the possibility of error) I show that this is a false dilemma. By taking a model theoretic approach to folk psychology, and marrying interpretivism with dispositionalism, interpretivists can viably reject the notion of an ideal (or canonical) interpreter and relativize attitudes to actual lay interpreters without taking on board the unacceptable epistemological consequences of allowing that attitudes are judgement dependent.
Devin Sanchez Curry
225370830
Interpretivism: for and against culture
Mike Crotty
225371630
Interpretivism: the way of hermeneutics
Mike Crotty
226359748
Interpretivism in Motion
Vivienne Schmidt discusses the Rudolph's development of their interpretative approach in the context of the spirited debates about epistemology and social science inquiry. She builds upon the Rudolphs' approach to elaborate 'discursive institutionalism' a mode of analysis that theorizes the nature of discourse and how discursive exchange contributes to political action and institutional change. Schmidt's chapter advances beyond most discursive analyses by theorizing 'ideational power' or the capacity of actors to use ideas to: influence other actors' normative and cognitive beliefs; control the meaning and normative value of ideas; and structure discourse by controlling its agenda. Ultimately, Schmidt makes a cogent case for methodological pluralism in the study of ideas, one that can engage and even synthesize a range of analytical approaches.
Vivien A Schmidt
229662728
How Postema's Jurisprudence as Sociable Science is Like Dworkin's Interpretivism
Saulo Monteiro Martinho de Matos
92997324
Intentional content in psychopathologies requires an expanded interpretivism
Abstract We argue that the explanatory role of intentional content in connecting symptoms in a network approach to psychopathology hinges neither on causality nor on rationality. Instead, we argue that it hinges on a pluralistic body of practical and clinical know how. Incorporating this practical approach to intentional state ascription in psychopathological cases expands and improves traditional interpretivism.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Marc Slors Jolien C Francken Derek W Strijbos
207540799
Introduction to positivism, interpretivism and critical theory.
BACKGROUND There are three commonly known philosophical research paradigms used to guide research methods and analysis: positivism, interpretivism and critical theory. Being able to justify the decision to adopt or reject a philosophy should be part of the basis of research. It is therefore important to understand these paradigms, their origins and principles, and to decide which is appropriate for a study and inform its design, methodology and analysis. AIM To help those new to research philosophy by explaining positivism, interpretivism and critical theory. DISCUSSION Positivism resulted from foundationalism and empiricism; positivists value objectivity and proving or disproving hypotheses. Interpretivism is in direct opposition to positivism; it originated from principles developed by Kant and values subjectivity. Critical theory originated in the Frankfurt School and considers the wider oppressive nature of politics or societal influences, and often includes feminist research. CONCLUSION This paper introduces the historical context of three well referenced research philosophies and explains the common principles and values of each. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE The paper enables nurse researchers to make informed and rational decisions when embarking on research.
Nurse researcher
Gemma Sinead Ryan Hanah Sfar-Gandoura