SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy / 2026 / Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2

Introduction to Value-Relevant and Normative Tradition in Philosophy of the Social Sciences

Ruhi Can Alkın
Ramazan Yelken
Pages
15–27
Publication Date
2014-12-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

On the other hand, understanding of “social science for the sake of society” instead of the idea of “social science for the sake of social science” will be examined.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Methodology, which is one of the most important areas subjected by philosophy of the social sciences, determines the epistemological and ontological position of scientific practice.
📊
Key Findings & Data:More specifically, study will illustrate the values and normative tradition in specific to research subjects and actors of social sciences.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:On the other hand, understanding of “social science for the sake of society” instead of the idea of “social science for the sake of social science” will be examined.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Philosophy of the social sciences · ontology · epistemology

Abstract

Methodology, which is one of the most important areas subjected by philosophy of the social sciences, determines the epistemological and ontological position of scientific practice. At this point, the current study proposes to critically analyze positivist epistemology in the social scientific practice while shedding light on the inevitable character of interpretivist methodology for this area. More specifically, study will illustrate the values and normative tradition in specific to research subjects and actors of social sciences. In doing so, study will assert that naturalistic approach, which focuses on cause and effect relations when examining social phenomena, will be shown as an inappropriate tradition in the social sciences in comparison to interpretivist methodology. On the other hand, understanding of “social science for the sake of society” instead of the idea of “social science for the sake of social science” will be examined.

🔖

Cite This Article

Alkın, R. C., Yelken, R. (2014). Introduction to Value-Relevant and Normative Tradition in Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2, 15–27. https://doi.org/10.18491/bijop.96819

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Bauböck, R. (2008). Normative Political Theory and Empirical Research. Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (eds. D. D. Porta &, M. Keating). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 40-60.
  2. Cohen, G. A. (2003). Facts and Principles. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 31 (3), 211-245.
  3. George, A. L. & Bennet, A. (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  4. Gerring, J. & Yesnowitz, J. (2006). A Normative Turn in Political Science. Polity, 38 (1), 101-133.
  5. Goodfrey-Smith, P. (2003). Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  6. Gillies, D. (1993). Philosophy of Science in the Twentieth Century: Four Central Themes. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
  7. Hesse, M. (1978). Theory and Value in the Social Sciences. Action and Interpretation: Studies in the Philosophy of the Social Sciences (eds. C. Hoowkway & P. Pettit). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-16.
  8. Homans, G. (1978). What Kind of a Myth is the Myth of a Value-Free Social Science. Social Science Quarterly, 58, 530-541.
  9. Kratochwil, F. (2008). Constructivism: What It is (Not) and How It Matters. Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (eds. D. D. Porta &, M. Keating). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 80-98.
  10. Meehan, E. J. (1969). Value Judgment and Social Science, Homewood: The Dorsey Press.
  11. Moses, J. W. & Knutsen, T. (2012). Ways of Knowing: Competing Methodologies in Social and Political Research. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  12. Porta, D. D. & Keating, M. (2008). How Many Approaches in the Social Sciences? An Epistemological Introduction. Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (eds. D. D. Porta &, M. Keating). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19-39.
  13. Rabinow, P. & Suvillan, M. (1979). The Interpretive Turn: Emergence of an Approach. Interpretive Social Science (eds. P. Rabinow, & M. Suvillan. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1-21.
  14. Shapiro, I. (2002). Problems, Methods, and Other Theories in the Study of Politics, or What’s Wrong With Political Science and What to Do About It. Political Theory, 30 (4), 596-619.
  15. Venesson, P. (2008). Case Studies and Process Tracing: Theories and Practices. Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (eds. D. D. Porta &, M. Keating). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 223-239.
  16. Winthrop, H. (1971). Some Relations between a Value-Free Sociology and Value-Oriented Sociologists. The American Sociologist, 6 (3), 261-262.