Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 11:58:00 -0800
From: David Harvey <dharvey-AT-unr.nevada.edu>
Subject: Re: BHA: Description in social science


Karl,
There is a vast d philosophical literature on the phenomenological method and its sociological offshoot, ethnomethodology.  Here the rules of empirically intuition via bracketing the non-dialectical essences of things from their appearance is well laid out.  In
sociology, see Aaron Cicourel and the authors published by Northwestern University Press in the seventies and eighties, and, at the theoretical level, the social constructivist such as Berger and Luckmann in their famous volume, The Social Construction of
Reality.  I myself prefer the paradigm articulated by the art historian, Erwin Panofsky, in his collection, Meaning in the Visual Arts. His method of description and hermenutic interpretation while grounded in art history, is easily translated into social science
precepts and vocabulary.  His approach  is neo-Kantian in the best sense of the word  in that it is strictly grounded in empirical givens while allowing for disciplined interpretation of the work itself that approaches Hegelian possibilities.  At the same time,
Panofsky's approach never allows interpretation to narcissistically turn in on itself, as does so  much of deconstructionist activity. To this extent, the essence never deserts the object under consideration, and, as such, meshes quite nicely with Bhaskar's
critical realist viewpoint.  Panofsky also practices the restraint of the neo-Kantians to the extent that empirical method is never inflated to the status of  ontology, the way so many others are willing to do  today.  Hope this helps.

Harvey

"karl.maton" wrote:

> Fleetwood, Steve wrote:
>
> >Dear all
> >
> >I am trying to think through the idea that the provision of an adequate explanation requires an adequate description. Whilst there is plenty of literature on explanation in social science, there seems to be little on description. Can anyone help me out here?
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> I'm being a bit behind here ... but I was going through some emails and
> thought you might be interested in a non-philosophical discussion of
> description. Basil Bernstein writes about two languages of description,
> an internal and an external one, when discussing theories and knowledge
> structures. He then relates this to how theories should provide
> principles of description to enable empirical research. There's lots
> more ... he talks about these things specifically in relation to his own
> conceptual framework and empirical research, so it might be an
> interestingly concrete discussion. I'll stop now in case it's not and
> because someone seems to be beating my head in, if this headache is to
> be believed. (Or maybe it's a mirage).
>
> --
> With best wishes,
>
> Karl
>
> Karl Maton
>
> Email: karl.maton-AT-ntlworld.com
> Email: karlmaton-AT-hotmail.com
> URL: http://www.KarlMaton.com
>
> This is your life and its ending one minute at a time.
>
>      --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


--- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---


     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---