Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:24:27 +0000 Subject: BHA: CR social theory - 'going dialectical'? Hi Alan Norrie and all, I've been reading with great interest: Alan Norrie, *Punishment, Responsibility and Justice: a relational critique*. OUP, 2000. (hardback), 242pp, 0 19 825956 5 Since the title could suggest that this is a book for legal theorists only, I would like to say that it emphatically is not - it is very relevant to social theory and analysis in general (agency/structure, person/self, etc and their bearing on issues of moral responsibility). Alan is one of the few critical realists who engages with Bhaskar's *Dialectic*. His book is worth consulting for its lucid account of the Hegelian epistemological dialectic and Bhaskar's development of it alone, and for its dialectical critique of the analytical method which informs legal thinking. There is also an interesting 'coming to terms' with poststructuralism, which draws on poststructuralism's own dialectical commitments and acknowledges the force of its critique of the abstract liberal subject while at the same time holding onto a notion of the reality of agency reflected in the concept of such a subject, thereby steering a (dialectical or relational) middle path between Kantianism and poststructuralism. To locate this path, Alan attempts to marry Bhaskar's social philosophy to Harre's social psychology. He admits that this is a controversial move in that there are significant differences of approach between the two, citing Margaret Archer's new book, *Being Human* Ch. 3 (the manuscript of which he doubtless had access to): Harre stresses the primacy of the social over the individual, which nonetheless has a relative autonomy; Bhaskar argues that human beings possess certain emergent powers by virtue of their biological constitution, and these powers are carried over into his account of human being in social relations. They share enough common ground however (Alan suggests) to make the move worthwhile. 'Harre's powerful account of the symbiotic quality of the relationship between the personal and the public finds the middle way between [Kantian individualism and social constructionism]... It helps to explain Bhaskar's dialectical sense of the ways in which individuals exist in a social and relational flow of being. The key aspect in both accounts is of a continuing, intrinsic connection between the individual and the social (Bhaskar), the personal and the public (Harre).... We [are given] a sense of a location of the self in an ambiguous and ambivalent 'space between' the individual and the social. The self forms and reforms, evolves and revolves in a world that is itself evolving and revolving.' (p. 213) While this is a little too processual and whirling for my own understanding, and possibly leaves the door ajar for 'sociological imperialism', it will be interesting to see whether the implicit invitation to (constructive) controversy is taken up and in particular whether the Archerian critical realist orthodoxy (recently supported and elaborated by Sean Creaven) can withstand baptism by fluid in *Dialectic*. I see no reason in principle why it can not, but the proof of the pudding will be in the eating.... Mervyn -- Mervyn Hartwig 13 Spenser Road Herne Hill London SE24 ONS United Kingdom Tel: 020 7 737 2892 Email: mh-AT-jaspere.demon.co.uk --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005