BESERİ BİLİMLER FELSEFESİNDE ANTİNATURALİST YAKLAŞIMIN ELEŞTİREL TEMELLERİNİN ANALİZİ

Year 2016, Issue: 2, 20 - 29, 30.09.2016

Ceray Aldemir

Abstract

Bu çalışma, naturalizm ve anti-natüralizm arasındaki tarihsel tartışmayı değerlendirme çabasının ürünüdür. Yazar, beşeri bilimler felsefesinde anti-natüralist yaklaşımı kabullün temellerini 3 farklı yaklaşımı ele alarak analiz etmektedir. İlk olarak doğa bilimleri ile sosyal bilimler arasındaki temel farklar Machlup’un kavramsallaştırmaları ışığında değerlendirelecektir. Fritz Machlup tarafından kullanılan temel karşılaştırma ‘sosyal bilimlerin bilim olarak kabul görülmeyişi’ fikrinin doğru olup olmadığını anlamayı amaçlar. İkinci olarak Mill ve Winch arasında klasik bir tartışma olan, sosyal bilimleri doğal bilimleri üzerine modellemenin mümkünlüğü çalışmada gösterilecektir. Son olarak ise Fay ve Moon tarafından kavramsallaştırılan natüralizm ve anti-natüralizm tartışmaları “Yeterli bir sosyal bilim nasıl olmalıdır?” sorunsalı üzerinden analiz edilecektir.

Keywords

Natüralizm, anti-natüralizm, bilim felsefesi.

THE CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE GROUNDS FOR ADOPTING AN ANTI-NATURALIST APPROACH TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMANITIES SCIENCES

Abstract

This paper is an attempt to evaluate the historical debate between naturalism and anti-naturalism. Here the writer illustrates the grounds for adopting an antinaturalist approach to the philosophy of the human sciences by examining different approaches. Firstly, the difference between natural and social science will be shown by using Machlup’s ideas. The ground comparison was used by Fritz Machlup aims to understand whether the idea of inferiority of the social sciences is correct or not. Secondly, a classical debate proposed by Mill and Winch will be
illustrated here and it aims to clarify the possibility of modeling the social science on natural science. An finally in the third part by focusing on Fay and Moon’s the naturalist and anti-naturalist debate will be examined by asking what would an adequate philosophy of social science look like?”

Keywords

Naturalism, anti-naturalism, philosophy of science.

References

• FAY, B. & MOON, D. (2001), What Would an Adequate Philosophy of Social Science Look Like?, In : Martin, M. and McIntyre L. (ed.) (2001), Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science, Bradford Book, MIT Press, Massachusetts.
• FAYE, Jan (2002), Rethinking Science: A Philosophical Introduction to the Unity of Science, Aldershort: Ashgate.
• GIDDENS, A. (1996), In Defence of Sociology: Essays, Interpretations and Rejoinders, Polity Press.
• HEILBRONER, R. L. (1984), “Economics and Political Economy: Marx, Keynes, and Schumpeter”, Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 18, No. 3, September, pp. 681-695
• KEAT, R. (1971), “Positivism, Naturalism, and Anti-Naturalism in the Social Sciences”, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, No: I, pp. 3-17.
• MACHLUP, F. (2001), Are the Social Science Really Inferior?, In : Martin, M. and McIntyre L. (ed.) (2001), Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science, Bradford Book, MIT Press, Massachusetts.
• MARTIN, M. & MCINTYRE L. (ed.) (2001), Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science, Bradford Book, MIT Press, Massachusetts.
• TAYLOR, C. (1980), “Understanding in Human Science”, The Review of Metaphysics, Vol: 34, No: 1, September, pp. 25-38.THROOP, W. & KNIGHT, M. (1987), “A Pragmatic Reconstruction of the Naturalism and Anti-naturalism Debate”, Journal for Theory of Social Behaviour, Vol: 17, Issue:1, pp.93-112.
• WINCH, P. (2008), The Idea of Social Science and Its Relation to Philosophy, Great Britain, Routledge