Defending Scientific Study of the Social

Against Clifford Geertz (and His Critics)

Dados Bibliográficos

ID5777927
AutoresKunio Yoshida (0000-0001-9554-4956, York University, autor correspondente), Kei Yoshida (0000-0003-1096-3807, York University, Toronto,)
Ano2007
Volume37
Fascículo3
Páginas289-314
Data de publicação2007-08-10
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoPhilosophy of the Social Sciences (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0048-3931 • E-ISSN: 1552-7441
EditoraSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0048393107303776
OpenAlexW2078839159
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas3
Referências citadas24

This paper will defend scientific study of the social by scrutinizing Clifford Geertz's interpretive anthropology, and evolutionary psychologists' criticism of it. I shall critically examine Geertz's identification of anthropology with literary criticism, his assumption that a science of society is possible only on a positivist model, his view of the relation between culture and mind, and his anti anti-relativism. Then I shall discuss evolutionary psychologists' criticism of Geertz's view as an exemplar of the so-called "Standard Social Science Model." Finally, I shall claim that both Geertz and evolutionary psychologists misunderstand the aim of the social sciences, which is to explain the unintended consequences of human actions in institutional contexts

Criticism · Epistemology · Identification · Identification (biology · Political science · Positivism · Relation (database · Relativism · Social science · Sociology · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Law · Mental Health and Psychiatry · Philosophy · Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education