Beyond Positivism: Habermas’ Critical Engagement with Scientific Rationality
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12726/tjp.35.8Keywords:
Positivism, Deductive-Nomological, Critical theory, Reductionism, empirical-analytic, historical-hermeneutic, critical-dialecticalAbstract
There is an assumption that natural science and social science must use the same methods in order to have a methodological unity of natural and social science. This assumption is developed primarily due to the reliance on the dominant approach called positivism or scientism. The notion of positivism or scientism which means using scientific facts and data-driven methods can provide real knowledge. The objectives of this paper is to take up Habermas’ position regarding this narrow views. Habermas’ argues that the belief that only scientific facts and data ignore how human actually think and interact or understand the world. He explores how our personal and social goals influence directly and indirectly what we consider ‘knowledge’. The paper also argued that Habermas’ ideas are not perfect and has not solved the realist approach to sociology. Therefore, Habermas reviews his own social theories and his attempts to fix problems in traditional Marxism and mainstream sociology. Again it is argued that sociology can get better if it keeps questioning and engaging with these complex ideas about science and reason through a critical dialogue with Habermas’ critical social theory.
References
Keat, R., & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, pp. 4-5.
Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of Natural Science, Prentice-Hall, Inc. USA, p. 240.
Ibid., p.243.
Keat, R., & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, p.10.
Ibid., pp.11-12.
Hempel, C. G. (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation, New York/London, pp. 333ff.
Samon, W. (1984). Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World, Princeton University Press, p. 197.
Keat, R., & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, pp.9-10.
Durkheim, E. (1952). Suicide: A Study in Sociology, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London, p. 209.
Keat, R., & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, p. 88.
Adey, G., & Frisby, D. (1976). The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, Heinemann Educational Books: London, pp. 91-92.
Ibid., p.94.
Ibid., p. 289.
Popper, K. (1994). The Poverty of Historicism, Routledge Publication, p.264.
Ibid., p.299.
Keat, R., & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, p. 29.
Ibid., p.34.
Ibid., pp. 79-80.
Popper, K. (1994). The Poverty of Historicism, Routledge Publication, p.268.
Scott, John P. (Mar., 1978). Critical Social Theory: An Introduction and Critique, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 29, No. 1, , pp. 1-3, Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The London School of Economics and Political Science.
Keat, R., & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, p. 223.
Ibid., pp. 222-224.
Ibid., p.223.
Scott, John P. (Mar., 1978). Critical Social Theory: An Introduction and Critique, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 4.
Adey, G. & Frisby, D. (1976). The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, Heinemann Educational Books: London, pp. 204-205.
Ibid., p. 209.
Keat, R., & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, p. 225.
Ibid., p. 227.
Scott John P. (Mar., 1978). Critical Social Theory: An Introduction and Critique, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 6.
Keat, R., & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, p. 225.
Scott John P. (Mar., 1978). Critical Social Theory: An Introduction and Critique, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 4-7.
Adey G. & Frisby D. (1976). The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, Heinemann Educational Books: London, pp. 205--206.
Keat, R. and Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, pp. 224-226.
Scott John P. (Mar., 1978). Critical Social Theory: An Introduction and Critique, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 12.
Keat, R. & Urry, J. (1975). Social theory as Science, Routledge and Kegan Paul: London and Boston, p. 224.
Adey G. & Frisby D. (1976). The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, Heinemann Educational Books: London, p. 211.
Scott, p. (Mar., 1978). Critical Social Theory: An Introduction and Critique, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 29, No. 1, p. 16.
Ibid., p. 17.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Himanshu Sekhar Sama
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
