Write an essay in which you explain the salient features of scientific realism and

realism in the social sciences?

Scientific realism and realism in the social sciences differ from one another in a
variety of different ways. Although one might fall under the impression that they
are similar concepts due to the term realism, in actual fact realism in the
natural sciences means a different thing to realism in the social sciences.
Scientific Realism
Scientific realism emerged as a reaction to the relativist philosophies of science
that were widespread during the 1970s with thinkers such as Feyeraband and
Kuhn subscribing to this relativist account of science (study guide 46). Contrary
to this position on science, scientific realism is a view which posits that
phenomena that is observed through scientific inquiry actually exists and is a
part of reality. In other words, realism posits that there are unobservable entities
that exist objectively independent of the mind. (PLS2607 page 33) Realists claim
that sciences ability to more and more accurately predict phenomena in the
natural world is not only due to scientists coming up with better scientific
theories to explain phenomena but because those theories are increasingly
becoming more accurate in explaining reality as it actually is. In other words, a
good scientific theory should not merely be able to explain and predict data, but
it should also be able to reflect the way unobservable theories are in reality
independent of human perception.
Realism can be understood in relation to relativism or instrumentalism whereby
scientific theories serve as a means to explain and make predictions about
various entities, but make no claim that those entities actually exist in reality.
The value of science is therefore in its explanatory power as opposed to its ability
to acturally describe reality or ascertain the truth. In other words,
instrumentalists reject the realist claim that science can uncover the truth
about reality and instead posits that science can only help understand what it is
that we perceive; we cannot know anything about mind independent reality as
we cannot overcome the hurd;e of perception which distorts the way we interact
with reality.
Realism in the social sciences
Realism in the social sciences is best understood in opposition to the other main
scientific approaches to social science, that is, positivism (empiricsm) or
relativism (historicism). Unlike empiricism which aims to examine the patterns of
social phenomena and establish social laws in order to make predictions and gain
explanatory power, realism aims to go a level deeper than what it considers the
positivist focus on the superficial structures of the social world rather than the
underlying structures and mehcanisms that make the superifical structures into
what they are. The realist account attempts to discover the generative
mechanisms which produce certain patterns of observed behaviour. Put simply,
realism rejects positivism which focuses on establish causal relationships
between events but rather focuses on the generative mechanisms which result
in such a causal relationship to exist in the first place.

For example, an empiricist might look at the way certain metals react when
coming into contact each with other. He might note that when metal A comes
into metal C it has X reaction, and when metal A comes into contact with metal B
it has certain reaction. But making these observations and deducing patterns
from multiple samples, the empiricist will draw up a conclusion and perhaps
declare a general rule for the relations between metals. However, the realist
would not be satisfied with this account of this phenomena as he/she would insist
on discovering and understanding the underlying mechanisms at play which
cause the metals to react in the way they do i.e. the molecules, electrons, atom
arrangements of the metals. In other words, the realist demands that we
discover the nature of metals
Karl Marx is an example of a critical realist who attempted to give an account of
the Capitalist system that dominated early 19th century England. Marx rejects the
reification of observable phenomenon that is characteristic of
empiricists/positivists as well as phenomenology of those who attempt to
analyse capitalism by placing too much emphasis on a participantss perceptions
of capitalism (page 230). Instead Marx tried to adopt a middle position. He
claimed that thinkers understood aspects of capitalism on a surface level without
trying to understand the underlying mechanism behind why features of
capitalism manifested in the way they did. This superficial analysis of capitalism
by positivists and phenomenologies allowed them only to see capitalism as it
appeared and not as it was in reality. The example he uses is that most people
view the exchange value of a commodity as a naturally given fixed property of
that commodity instead examining the underlying features that go into
comodities, that is the organization of capital and labour based on production
and appropriation of surplus value (page 230)
Roy Bhaskars Transcendental Realism
Retroduction
Bhasker argued for critical realism which attempted to account for the
ingredients that made social life possible. Instead of going down the empiricist
route of merely explaining casual relationships as they exist between social
objects, realism, or transcendtal realism as posited by Bhaskar, attempts
retroductively split up social life into stratified parts and explain those parts
independently of one another in order to carry out an a priori deduction of the
general properties of societies (reader 232). Bhaskar attempts to find a sort of
middle ground between methological individualism and a collectivist account
of society, positing a transformational model which emphasizes the
interdependent relationship between people and the social structures that exist
in society. In other words, he puts forward a symbiotic relationship between
social structures and people, stating that society cannot exist independently of
human actions but instead provides the conditions for intentional human action;
neither can society exist without intentional human action. (233)