In:
Philosophy of the Social Sciences, SAGE Publications, Vol. 45, No. 2 ( 2015-03), p. 258-265
Abstract:
This article responds to Stephen Turner’s discussion of my article, “Historicism and Critique.” I emphasize that radical historicism consists of substantive philosophical commitments. One commitment is to a historicized epistemology that presents objective knowledge as a product of a comparison between rival webs of belief. Another commitment is to a historical ontology that presents aggregate concepts in the social sciences as inherently pragmatic. These substantive commitments provide a plausible basis for various forms of critique. They lead to analyses of genealogical and ideological critique that differ from appeals to genealogy as a kind of groundless skepticism toward, and problematization of, all substantive commitments.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0048-3931
,
1552-7441
DOI:
10.1177/0048393114531374
Language:
English
Publisher:
SAGE Publications
Publication Date:
2015
detail.hit.zdb_id:
1494070-X
SSG:
5,1
SSG:
3,4
