PaRCha - JNU - Letters to Administration - 2004 ID-65231
.
.. ,.
.
. ~ '' .
Centre for Philosophy .
School ofSocial Sciences · .
.
M.Phil Programme -· .
-· -.
.
Serond Semester : Optionil Course .
Course Title Philosophy of Social Sciences .
Credits 4 .
.
'Contact Hours : 4 per \Veek .
Mode ofEvaluation : 2 mid-term presentations: 50% ( 25%.each) .
.
1 End-tem1 examination :50% .
The purpose ofthis course is to engage in an analysis ofphilosophical issues concerning the nature ofsocial phenomena and its scientific explanation. Social Scientists attempt to unde!'Stand the social world at both individual and collective levels. This roises ontological questions such as: Do societies or social structures have an existence.over and .
above the individuals that constitute them? Is th~ indi\rid~ "self~a social construction? What sorts of 'social things, exist and which ofthem are more fundamental or basic than others? Epistemological questions deal with the possibilities and ways ofknowing. When we try to know social phenomena, what we are attempting to know and ho~v do we find that we have come to kno'v? Can there be social phenomena that are so alien to us that these are beyond our understanding? Can we ever be certain that we understand the practices of other cultures and societies? Such ontological and epistemological quesrions have generated critical cit:bates among practitioners and theorists ofsocial sciences. .
Since the mid-19th century, a persisting debate in the philosophy of social sciences is whether the methods ofnatural science are appropriate for the study ofhurnan subjects and the understanding of social phenomena. Should the ~ocial sciences be required to .
follow the methods upheld in Ll-te practice of natural sciences or do they call for a henneneutic methodology to deal with the peculiar characteristics ofhuman beings and social phenomena ? The naturalists contended that any scientific study of social phenomena must use the same methods that are followed in natural sciences, \"'-ihile their opponents argued that any such attempt is doomed to fail .
.
-.
The votaries ofnatural scientific discourses employ the terminology ofobjects, qualities, quantities, relations, events, processes, structures, functions etc to describe and explain social phenomena. In such discourses society is viewed as a process or a system or a structure of relations to be described and explained. In contrast, the non-naturalist .
. discourses use the terminology of subjects, persons, self, symbols and meanings, rationality, purposes and goals, norms, practices, traditions, situations, roles etc and view society ~eras.an institutiol\ a community, a contract, or a play or a discourse to be interpreted and understood. · .
In addition to the competing claims ofthe votaries ofcausal explanation and hermeneutic .
understanding, Jurgen Habennas has proposed that one of the main tasks of social sciences is to develop a critique of the prevalent social structures, institutions and practices through a critical engagement with its subjects. Such a cxitique, it is argue~ is a pre-requisite f~achieving the goals ofsocial transfonnation and human emancipation. .
1. .
.
.. .
.
.
PaRCha - JNU - Letters to Administration - 2004 ID-65231
.
.. ,.
.
. ~ '' .
Centre for Philosophy .
School ofSocial Sciences · .
.
M.Phil Programme -· .
-· -.
.
Serond Semester : Optionil Course .
Course Title Philosophy of Social Sciences .
Credits 4 .
.
'Contact Hours : 4 per \Veek .
Mode ofEvaluation : 2 mid-term presentations: 50% ( 25%.each) .
.
1 End-tem1 examination :50% .
The purpose ofthis course is to engage in an analysis ofphilosophical issues concerning the nature ofsocial phenomena and its scientific explanation. Social Scientists attempt to unde!'Stand the social world at both individual and collective levels. This roises ontological questions such as: Do societies or social structures have an existence.over and .
above the individuals that constitute them? Is th~ indi\rid~ "self~a social construction? What sorts of 'social things, exist and which ofthem are more fundamental or basic than others? Epistemological questions deal with the possibilities and ways ofknowing. When we try to know social phenomena, what we are attempting to know and ho~v do we find that we have come to kno'v? Can there be social phenomena that are so alien to us that these are beyond our understanding? Can we ever be certain that we understand the practices of other cultures and societies? Such ontological and epistemological quesrions have generated critical cit:bates among practitioners and theorists ofsocial sciences. .
Since the mid-19th century, a persisting debate in the philosophy of social sciences is whether the methods ofnatural science are appropriate for the study ofhurnan subjects and the understanding of social phenomena. Should the ~ocial sciences be required to .
follow the methods upheld in Ll-te practice of natural sciences or do they call for a henneneutic methodology to deal with the peculiar characteristics ofhuman beings and social phenomena ? The naturalists contended that any scientific study of social phenomena must use the same methods that are followed in natural sciences, \"'-ihile their opponents argued that any such attempt is doomed to fail .
.
-.
The votaries ofnatural scientific discourses employ the terminology ofobjects, qualities, quantities, relations, events, processes, structures, functions etc to describe and explain social phenomena. In such discourses society is viewed as a process or a system or a structure of relations to be described and explained. In contrast, the non-naturalist .
. discourses use the terminology of subjects, persons, self, symbols and meanings, rationality, purposes and goals, norms, practices, traditions, situations, roles etc and view society ~eras.an institutiol\ a community, a contract, or a play or a discourse to be interpreted and understood. · .
In addition to the competing claims ofthe votaries ofcausal explanation and hermeneutic .
understanding, Jurgen Habennas has proposed that one of the main tasks of social sciences is to develop a critique of the prevalent social structures, institutions and practices through a critical engagement with its subjects. Such a cxitique, it is argue~ is a pre-requisite f~achieving the goals ofsocial transfonnation and human emancipation. .
1. .
.
.. .
.
.