Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Table 1: Bhaskar’s three domains (1978:56)  There are areas in critical realism which are problematic, such as the nature of the causality provided by human agency (Archer, 2002; Hodgson 2003), or the vagueness o Bhaskar’s description of social mechanisms (Baéhr, 1990:771). The first problem can be addressed by distinguishing between contingent (i.e. incidental) and intentional (i.e purposeful) causality (Pratt, 2006). The second problem is not specific to critical realism as social science literature in general contains somewhat vague definitions of the tern “social mechanism” (see Mahoney, 2003:14-15). Franck’s (2002) work on modelling goe: some way towards clarifying the term by representing a social mechanism as having bott formal and practical aspects, reflected in a theoretical and empirical’ model respectively The critical realist preoccupation with mechanisms (i.e. complex systems of forces) is at attempt to understand the deep structure or “essences” of things (Bhaskar, 1978:19) including the complex social processes in which humans are involved on an everyda' basis. But understanding is not enough: according to Bhaskar, social science “alway: consists in a practical intervention in social life’ (1986:169). While an idea can be & powerful motivating factor and have true causal force, it is doing - praxis - whicl transforms social structures, as it is human agency which keeps these in place. As Arche points out, human agency has the potential to transform not only our own lives but the lives of those around us (2002:19).

Table 1 Bhaskar’s three domains (1978:56) There are areas in critical realism which are problematic, such as the nature of the causality provided by human agency (Archer, 2002; Hodgson 2003), or the vagueness o Bhaskar’s description of social mechanisms (Baéhr, 1990:771). The first problem can be addressed by distinguishing between contingent (i.e. incidental) and intentional (i.e purposeful) causality (Pratt, 2006). The second problem is not specific to critical realism as social science literature in general contains somewhat vague definitions of the tern “social mechanism” (see Mahoney, 2003:14-15). Franck’s (2002) work on modelling goe: some way towards clarifying the term by representing a social mechanism as having bott formal and practical aspects, reflected in a theoretical and empirical’ model respectively The critical realist preoccupation with mechanisms (i.e. complex systems of forces) is at attempt to understand the deep structure or “essences” of things (Bhaskar, 1978:19) including the complex social processes in which humans are involved on an everyda' basis. But understanding is not enough: according to Bhaskar, social science “alway: consists in a practical intervention in social life’ (1986:169). While an idea can be & powerful motivating factor and have true causal force, it is doing - praxis - whicl transforms social structures, as it is human agency which keeps these in place. As Arche points out, human agency has the potential to transform not only our own lives but the lives of those around us (2002:19).