Date: Thu,  6 Nov 2003 10:05:00 -0500
Subject: Re: BHA: Description in social science


Hi Steve,

To my mind, the provision of an adequate desription is in large part what
CONSTITUTES an explanation, from a hermeneutic perspective.  The very best piece
that I know of on this point is Charles Taylor's old but wonderful
"Interpretation and the Sciences of Man."  I'm sure that others will have other
suggestions, and no doubt more recent ones, but don't overlook Taylor on this. 
That article is in Philosophical Papers -- I think in volume 2, called
Philosophy and Social Science.

I've written a little tiny bit on this -- on why I think Bhaskar's approach in
PON to combining the "What?" question with the "Why?" question falls short. 
It'll be out soon, but let me know if you want me to send you something.  Note
that this email address is about the be defunct.  The new working one is
Ruth.Groff-AT-Marquette.edu 

Ruth 






 Quoting "Fleetwood, Steve" <s.fleetwood-AT-lancaster.ac.uk>:

> Dear all
> 
> I am trying to think through the idea that the provision of an adequate
> explanation requires an adequate description. Whilst there is plenty of
> literature on explanation in social science, there seems to be little on
> description. Can anyone help me out here?
> 
> Regards
> 
> Steve 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr. Steve Fleetwood
> Department of Organisation, Work & Technology
> Lancaster University Management School
> Lancaster LA1 4 YX
> Tel: 01524 594040
> Fax: 01524 504060
>  
> 
> 
> 
>      --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> 
> 




     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---