Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

Group presentation for Masters @ City University London






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 194

http://moodle.city.ac.uk 193
http://moodle-archive.city.ac.uk 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • This is an attempt to place Critical Realism within one of the two major schools of thought. It is not possible to give a definitive and exhaustive list of paradigms, because the labels for different approaches are not used in standard ways. Instead, they are usually employed by researchers in socially situated ways.Because all measurement is fallible, the post-positivist emphasizes the importance of multiple measures and observations, each of which may possess different types of error, and the need to use triangulation across these multiple errorful sources to try to get a better bead on what's happening in reality. The post-positivist also believes that all observations are theory-laden and that scientists (and everyone else, for that matter) are inherently biased by their cultural experiences, world views, and so on. This is not cause to give up in despair, however. Just because I have my world view based on my experiences and you have yours doesn't mean that we can't hope to translate from each other's experiences or understand each other. Most post-positivists are constructivists who believe that we each construct our view of the world based on our perceptions of it. Because perception and observation is fallible, our constructions must be imperfect.One of the most common forms of post-positivism is a philosophy called critical realism.
  • Let us put Critical Realism in context by looking at Hammersley’s argument in our paper.
  • CRITICALCritical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. So People who think critically consistently attempt to live rationally, reasonably, empathically.   They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked.Critical Realism is a specific form of realism that recognises the reality and holds that we will only be able to understand- and so change- the social world if we identify the structures at work that generate the reality. So a critical realist believes that there is a reality independent of our thinking about it that science can study. Its useful to point out that this is in contrast with a subjectivist who would hold that there is no external reality -- we're each making this all up!). Positivists were also realists. The difference is that the critical realist recognizes that all observation is fallible and has error and that all theory is revisable. In other words, the critical realist is critical of our ability to know reality with certainty. Where the positivist believed that the goal of science was to uncover the truth, critical realist believes that the goal of science is to hold steadfastly to the goal of getting it right about reality, even though we can never achieve that goal!
  • Roy A. Bhaskar (born 1944) is a British philosopher, born in London, and is known as the founder of the philosophical movement:Critical Realism. Unlike most of the other philosophers we come across in this course, Bhaskar is still ALIVE.In 1963 Bhaskar went to Oxford University on a scholarship to read Politics, Philosophy, and Economics. Having graduated with first class honours, he began work on a PhD thesis about the relevance of economic theory for under-developed countries. It was this research that led him to the philosophy of social science first before he moved to working on the philosophy of science. Since 1995 he has worked full-time on the Centre for Critical Realism and the International Association of Critical Realism.
  • MartynHammersleyis Professor of Educational and Social Research at The Open University. He has carried out research in the sociology of education and the sociology of the media. However, much of his work has been concerned with the methodological issues surrounding social enquiry. He has written several books, including: The Politics of Social Research (Sage 1995); Taking Sides in Social Research (Routledge, 1999)and Questioning Qualitative Inquiry (Sage 2008).
  • p

Group presentation for Masters @ City University London Group presentation for Masters @ City University London Presentation Transcript

  • WEEK7
    tony liu
    Group Presentation
  • Method
  • Positivism
    Critical Realism
  • Hammersley argues:
  • Critical Realism Fails to Justify Critical Social Research
  • Letsbreakdownthe argument
  • Critical Realism Fails to Justify Critical Social Research
    Critical Realism
    Critical Social Research
  • RoyBhaskar
  • MartynHammersley
  • Introduction
    Does not disagree with the concept of realism
    Agrees that research should be critical
    Subjected to Criticism
    “Very often, the relationship between the political value judgements underpinning this commitment and the values intrinsic to inquiry, as a distinct form of activity have been left obscure”
    “Researchers fail to explicate the basis for their critical orientation”
    Teleological account of the world
    Marx and Hegel believed that value conclusions should be drawn from factual evidence
    Subjectivist position
    Contemporary climate, subjectivist positions are encouraged and value judgments do not have to be rationally justified
    Critical realism offers both an objective but non teleological rationale for ‘critical’ orientation
    Hammersley argues that critical realism cannot justify critical social research
    He talks about two type of arguments which are at the core of critical realism
    Cognitive argument: draw value conclusions from factual evidence
    Non cognitive argument:concerns other aspects of human life, draw conclusions about what is wrong and what ought to be done
  • Cognitive argument
  • 1
    If you establish a fact – it’s a truth that other people should believe
    If institutions are generating beliefs which are incompatible - these should be criticized or changed
  • BUT
  • Is not logical...
    • You can never have ‘absolute’ knowledge
    • Can’t assume social science produces ‘true’ facts
    • People’s beliefs – in ‘true’ and ‘false’ things – aren’t generated differently
  • SO
  • You can’t use your ‘facts’ to criticise institutions
    • Do institutions generate beliefs anyway?
    • Could they generate both true AND false beliefs?
    • How can you tell what is true or false?
  • For these reasons, Hammersley argues that the cognitive argument is not a secure basis for arguing that social science and realism can and should be ‘critical’
  • Non-Cognitive argument
  • If we establish that someone suffers from an unmet need, such as the absence of food, then it follows automatically, other things being equal, that action should be taken to meet this need
    Frustration of a need is not only generated by some institution but is necessary for the reproduction of that institution, then the conclusion follows (other things being equal) that the institution should be changed
  • Need is a problematic concept that involves a value assumption...
    Factual statement – a person does not have food and is likely to die as a result
    Value assumption – no human being should starve to death
    Evaluation – this is an undesirable situation
  • Denying someone food may be a desirable situation
    Many needs involve more than one value assumption
  • Literacy and numeracy are basic needs in society
    Elementary or other levels
    Example: Minimum requirement GCSE A-C
  • Multiple Value
    Other things being equal - is not helpful
    Disagreement with multiple values
    What is good or bad?
    What should or should not be done?
    Change in circumstances
    No expertise or authority to make the decision.
  • There is no justification for claiming that social scientists can conclusively determine what counts as a need that should be met on any particular occasion.
    Since this is a matter for practical value judgement, here too social science cannot claim any distinctive authority.
  • Conclusion
  • Critical realism offers a rationale for being critical
    However neither of the two arguments making up this rationale is convincing
  • Reason
  • Commitment to the principle that researchers should strive to be value-neutral or objective.
    Social scientists should not imply that value conclusions can be validated through their work.