ANTINOMIES OF RESEARCH METHODS IN SOCIAL SCIENCES: METHODENSTREIT

Jelena Božilovć

DOI Number
10.22190/FUPSPH1702089B
First page
089
Last page
101

Abstract


The central issue of this paper is the so-called dispute over methods (Methodenstreit), which is based on the essential difference between natural and social phenomena. Methodological problems in sociology are related to the determination of its subject matter, and the history of the science has showed that these problems have represented the main point of disagreement between theoreticians. The debates on the issues of natural and social phenomena and, thus related, manners of their examination, began as early as in the times of ancient philosophy – starting with Aristotle, and continued through the so-called Galilean tradition that would find its peak in the positivist movement and the historistic school as its opposition. The paper draws attention to the theoretical-methodological positions of both sides in this dispute, the reaffirmation of hermeneutics, as well as the ideological background. Furthermore, certain opinions that formed through the integration of these two methodological approaches are also discussed here. The time of the Methodenstreit is the time when sociology was constituted, thus the concluding remarks emphasize the importance of this dispute for the constitution of sociology as a science, with a particular reflection on the influence of historism on German sociologists.

Keywords

Positivism, historism, hermeneutics, Romanticism, sociology.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Berk, Piter. Osnovi kulturne istorije. Beograd: Clio, 2010.

Brdar, Milan. Pouke skromnosti: Karl Poper, otvoreno društvo, nauka i filozofija. Beograd: Zavod za udžbenike, 2008.

Diltaj, Vilhelm. Izgradnja istorijskog sveta u duhovnim naukama. Beograd: BIGZ, 1980a.

Diltaj, Vilhelm. Zasnivanje duhovnih nauka. Beograd: Prosveta, 1980b.

Hauser, Arnold. Sociologija umjetnosti 1. Zagreb: Školska knjiga, 1986.

Janjion, Maria. Romantizam, revolucija, marskizam. Beograd: Nolit, 1976.

Kulenović, Nina. „Metodološki individualizam nasuprot metodološkom holizmu“. U: Etnoantropološki problemi, n.s. god. 9, sv. 2 (2014), 309–333.

Menger, Karl. Istraživanja o metodi društvenih nauka s posebnim osvrtom na političku ekonomiju. Beograd: Službeni glasnik, 2008.

Milić, Vojin. Sociološki metod. Beograd: Nolit, 1978.

Milosavljević, Ljubinko. Podsticanje slobode. Niš: Filozofski fakultet, 2008.

Nejgel, Ernest. Struktura nauke. Beograd: Nolit, 1974.

Poper, Karl. Beda istoricizma. Beograd: Dereta, 2009.

Ružić, Goran i Božilović, Jelena. “Hajdegerovo tumačenje pojma istorije kod Vilhelma Diltaja i Jorka fon Vartenburga”. U Istorija ideja i promišljanje savremenog sveta, uredila. G. Stojić, 243–259. Niš: Filozofski fakultet, 2016.

Staiti, Andrea. “Heinrich Rickert”. In: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (ed. Edward N. Zalta). Stanford University: Center for the Study of Language and Information, 2013. (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/heinrich-rickert/)

Stojanović, Božo. „Karl Menger i austrijska škola“, predgovor knjizi: Karl Menger, Istraživanja o metodi društvenih nauka, s posebnim osvrtom na političku ekonomiju, 1–25. Beograd: Službeni glasnik, 2008.

Šušnjić, Đuro. Teorije kulture: predavanja. Beograd: Zavod za udžbenike, 2015.

Tenis, Ferdinand. „Zajednica i društvo“ U: Formalizam u sociologiji, uredio Radomir Lukić, 235–241. Zagreb: Naprijed, 1987.

Von Wright, Georg Henrick. Objašnjenje i razumevanje. Beograd: Nolit, 1975.

Windelband, Wilhelm. „History and Natural Science“, In: History and Theory, Vol. 19, No. 2, (1980): 169–185.

Zafranski, Ridiger. Romantizam: jedna nemačka afera. Novi Sad: Adresa, 2011.

Zimel, Georg. „Sociologija“. U: Formalizam u sociologiji, uredio Radomir Lukić, 247–260. Zagreb: Naprijed, 1987.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN 1820-8495 (Print)

ISSN 1820-8509 (Online)