The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Realist Theory of Science
Abstract
First Published in 2008. Now acknowledged as a classic in the philosophy of science, A Realist Theory of Science is one of the very few books which has transformed not only our understanding of science, but that of the nature of the world it studies. Since its original publication in 1975, the book has inspired the multi-disciplinary and international movement of thought known as "critical realism"; and its ideas have been influential across the whole spectrum of the sciences, arts and humanities and in a diverse array of social practices and professions. In this book, Roy Bhaskar sets out to revindicate ontology, critiquing the reduction of being in favor of knowledge, which he calls the "epistemic fallacy". Employing a transcendental argument from the nature of experimental activity, he establishes a critique of the dominant positivist and neo-Kantian traditions in the philosophy of science, developing a new ontology in which concepts of structure, difference and change come to the fore. Then, analyzing the nature of scientific discovery and development, he shows how, against both the empiricist and rationalist traditions, science can come to have a posteriori knowledge of natural necessity. The resultant position, which the author characterizes as transcendental realism, has the power to resolve many traditional philosophical problems, such as the problem of induction. At the same time it lays the basis for radically new accounts of social science, ethics and the project of human emancipation. A new introduction to this edition by Mervyn Hartwig decribes the significance of A Realist Theory of Science throughout the humanities world, and offers an expert critique of its content.
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
Cites
The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory
Duhem, P. M. M. (1954) · doi:10.1515/9780691233857 · Cited by 2,128
Cited by
Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology
Mingers, J. (2001) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.12.3.240.9709 · Cited by 1,380
A Review of Theory and Practice in Scientometrics
Mingers, J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002 · Cited by 1,002
What’s in a mechanism? Development of a key concept in realist evaluation
Dalkin, S. M., Greenhalgh, J., Jones, D., Cunningham, B., & Lhussier, M. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0237-x · Cited by 896
Unpacking black boxes: mechanisms and theory building in evaluation
Astbury, B., & Leeuw, F. L. (2010) · American Journal of Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1098214010371972 · Cited by 850
The Validity of Idiographic Research Explanations
Tsoukas, H. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258558 · Cited by 788
Metadata
- Authors
- Bhaskar, R.
- Venue
- Routledge eBooks
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2013-01-28
- OpenAlex
- W2101234667
- Cited by
- 4,012
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 262.95
- Type
- book
- 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: A Realist Theory of Science. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9780203090732
- The paper
- Bhaskar, R. (2013). A Realist Theory of Science. Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203090732
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.