Challenges of naturalism in social science methodology

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

PhD in philosophy of Islamic economics

Abstract
This article examines and discusses the application of naturalistic methodology in social sciences and the challenges facing this methodology. Social science methodology faces a fundamental question; whether the application of natural science methodology in social sciences is efficient or not. In response to this fundamental and important question, some have proposed a methodology similar to that of natural sciences in social sciences, while others have pointed out the differences between natural sciences and social sciences and have advocated a methodology specific to social sciences. The first approach is described as naturalism and the second approach as anti-naturalism. It seems that the purpose we consider for science or whether we give logical precedence to theory or observation can have a fundamental impact on the methodology adopted. As a result, this article defends a critical naturalistic approach. In this methodology, it distances itself from the purely reductionist and positivist currents in the social sciences and advocates a modified naturalism as one of the efficient methodological approaches in the social sciences. However, unlike most naturalists, it does not consider this methodology as an exclusive approach in social research and considers it useful alongside methods specific to the social sciences.

Keywords

Subjects

Here are the references formatted according to APA style:
Beed, C. (2005). Naturalised epistemology and economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29(1), 99-117. Published by Oxford University Press.
Caldwell, B. (1980). Positivist philosophy of science and the methodology of economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 14(1), 53-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.1980.11503899
Frazer, E. (1995). What’s new in the philosophy of social science? Oxford Review of Education, 21(3), 267-281. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305498950210303
Friedman, M. (1966). The methodology of positive economics. In Essays in Positive Economics (pp. 3-16, 30-43). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gonzalez, J. W. (2014). The evolution of Lakatos’s repercussion on the methodology of economics. HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 4(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1086/675511
Gorton, A. W. (2006). Karl Popper and the social sciences. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Hausman, M. D., & McPherson, S. M. (1993). Taking ethics seriously: Economics and contemporary moral philosophy. Journal of Economic Literature, 31(2), 671-731. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.31.2.671
Heather, E. D. (2022). Reintroducing prediction to explanation. Philosophy of Science, 76(4), 444–463. https://doi.org/10.1086/648111
Hempel, C. G. (1969). Logical positivism and the social sciences. In P. Achinstein & S. Barker (Eds.), The legacy of logical positivism (pp. 1-20). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Keat, R. (1971). Positivism, naturalism, and anti-naturalism in the social sciences. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 1(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1971.tb00002.x
Lawson, T. (1997). Economics and reality. London and New York: Routledge.
Lawson, T. (2019). The nature of social reality: Issues in social ontology. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429433937
Shapere, D. (1966). Meaning and scientific change. In R. Colodny (Ed.), Mind and Cosmos (pp. 1-20). University of Pittsburgh Press.
Jackson, W. A. (2016). Naturalism in economics. Pages 761-780. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1131200.
References [In Persian]
Canfield, John W. History of Western Philosophy, Vol. 10: Philosophy of Meaning, Knowledge, and Value in the Twentieth Century, translated by Yaser Khoshnevis. Tehran: Hekmat Publications, 2013 (First Edition). [In Persian]
Capstone, Frederick. History of Philosophy, Vol. 1, translated by Seyyed Jalaleddin Mojtabavi. Tehran: 2006. [In Persian]
Capstone, Frederick. History of Philosophy: English Philosophers from Hobbes to Hume, Vol. 5, translated by Amir Jalaleddin. Tehran: Soroush Publications, 2022. [In Persian]
Dilthey, Wilhelm. Introduction to the Human Sciences, translated by Manouchehr Sanei Darreh Bidi. Tehran: Ghoghnoos Publications, 2014 (Third Edition). [In Persian]
Fazeli, Payam. “A Re-evaluation of Milton Friedman’s View on Instrumentalism.” Hekmat va Falsafeh, Vol. 20, Spring 2024, No. 1 (77). [In Persian]
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason, translated by Behrouz Nazari. Tehran: Qoqnoos Publications, 2016 (Second Edition). [In Persian]
Kerney, Richard. History of Western Philosophy, Vol. 8: Continental Philosophy in the Twentieth Century, translated by Maryam Khodadayi. Tehran: Hekmat Publications, 2019 (First Edition). [In Persian]
Popper, Karl Raimund. The Logic of Scientific Discovery, translated by Seyyed Hossein Kamali. Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi Publications, 1991 (First Edition). [In Persian]
Shanker, S.J. History of Western Philosophy, Vol. 9: Philosophy of Science, Logic, and Mathematics in the Twentieth Century, translated by Abolfazl Haqiri. Tehran: Hekmat Publications, 2013 (First Edition). [In Persian]