The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation.
Abstract
Following on from Roy Bhaskar's first two books, A Realist Theory of Science and The Possibility of Naturalism, Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation, establishes the conception of social science as explanatory-and thence emancipatory-critique. Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation starts from an assessment of the impasse of contemporary accounts of science as stemming from an incomplete critique of positivism. It then proceeds to a systematic exposition of scientific realism in the form of transcendental realism, highlighting a conception of science as explanatory of a structured, differentiated and changing world. Turning to the social domain, the book argues for a view of the social order as conditioned by, and emergent from, nature. Advocating a critical naturalism, the author shows how the transformational model of social activity together with the conception of social science as explanatory critique which it entails, resolves the divisions and dualisms besetting orthodox social and normative theory: between society and the individual, structure and agency, meaning and behavior, mind and body, reason and cause, fact and value, and theory and practice. The book then goes on to discuss the emancipatory implications of social science and sketches the nature of the depth investigation characteristically entailed. In the highly innovative third part of the book Roy Bhaskar completes his critique of positivism by developing a theory of philosophical discourse and ideology, on the basis of the transcendental realism and critical naturalism already developed, showing how positivism functions as a restrictive ideology of and for science and other social practices.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Van Dijk, T. A. (2015) · The Handbook of Discourse Analysis · doi:10.1002/9781118584194.ch22 · Cited by 5,485
Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method
Jørgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (2002) · doi:10.4135/9781849208871 · Cited by 4,118
What's at stake in the agent-structure debate?
Dessler, D. (1989) · International Organization · doi:10.1017/s0020818300032999 · Cited by 678
Sexual Dissidence: Augustine to Wilde, Freud to Foucault
Dollimore, J. (1991) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198112259.001.0001 · Cited by 630
Thinking with Bourdieu against Bourdieu: A ‘Practical’ Critique of the Habitus
King, A. (2000) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.1111/0735-2751.00109 · Cited by 586
Metadata
- Authors
- Sprinker, M., & Bhaskar, R.
- Venue
- MLN
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1987-12
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1225
- ISSN
- 0026-7910 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2009699326
- Cited by
- 1,150
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 59.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2905327
- The paper
- Sprinker, M., & Bhaskar, R. (1987). Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation. MLN. https://doi.org/10.2307/2905327
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.