Artwork

Inhoud geleverd door Center for Mind, Brain, and Culture, Emory College, Emory Center for Mind, and Culture (CMBC). Alle podcastinhoud, inclusief afleveringen, afbeeldingen en podcastbeschrijvingen, wordt rechtstreeks geüpload en geleverd door Center for Mind, Brain, and Culture, Emory College, Emory Center for Mind, and Culture (CMBC) of hun podcastplatformpartner. Als u denkt dat iemand uw auteursrechtelijk beschermde werk zonder uw toestemming gebruikt, kunt u het hier beschreven proces https://nl.player.fm/legal volgen.
Player FM - Podcast-app
Ga offline met de app Player FM !

McCauley Honorary | Kareem Khalifa "The Methodenstreit Ain't Right: McCauley on Interpretation and Explanation"

30:02
 
Delen
 

Manage episode 384904333 series 2538953
Inhoud geleverd door Center for Mind, Brain, and Culture, Emory College, Emory Center for Mind, and Culture (CMBC). Alle podcastinhoud, inclusief afleveringen, afbeeldingen en podcastbeschrijvingen, wordt rechtstreeks geüpload en geleverd door Center for Mind, Brain, and Culture, Emory College, Emory Center for Mind, and Culture (CMBC) of hun podcastplatformpartner. Als u denkt dat iemand uw auteursrechtelijk beschermde werk zonder uw toestemming gebruikt, kunt u het hier beschreven proces https://nl.player.fm/legal volgen.

Kareem Khalifa | Philosophy, University of California, Los Angeles
"The Methodenstreit Ain't Right: McCauley on Interpretation and Explanation"

Does interpretation distinguish the human sciences from the natural sciences? Or do explanations drive the human sciences in a manner akin to their more venerable natural-scientific cousins? These questions fueled the decades-old Methodenstreit (“methodological dispute”) about the foundations of the social sciences. Rising above the fray, McCauley has long endorsed interactionism, according to which interpretations and explanations of the same cultural-symbolic phenomenon are complements rather than competitors. He contrasts interactionism with exclusivism, which holds that only one of these approaches is applicable to cultural-symbolic phenomena, and inclusivism, which subordinates explanation to interpretation. However, all three of these positions assume that there is a nontrivial distinction between interpretation and explanation. By contrast, I will argue that putative examples of interpretations that defy explanation rely on overly restrictive conceptions of causation, lawlike generalizations, or perspective-taking in the natural sciences. As a result, all cultural-symbolic phenomena should be explained, though different explanations of those phenomena are still mutually beneficial in the ways that interactionism suggests.

  continue reading

292 afleveringen

Artwork
iconDelen
 
Manage episode 384904333 series 2538953
Inhoud geleverd door Center for Mind, Brain, and Culture, Emory College, Emory Center for Mind, and Culture (CMBC). Alle podcastinhoud, inclusief afleveringen, afbeeldingen en podcastbeschrijvingen, wordt rechtstreeks geüpload en geleverd door Center for Mind, Brain, and Culture, Emory College, Emory Center for Mind, and Culture (CMBC) of hun podcastplatformpartner. Als u denkt dat iemand uw auteursrechtelijk beschermde werk zonder uw toestemming gebruikt, kunt u het hier beschreven proces https://nl.player.fm/legal volgen.

Kareem Khalifa | Philosophy, University of California, Los Angeles
"The Methodenstreit Ain't Right: McCauley on Interpretation and Explanation"

Does interpretation distinguish the human sciences from the natural sciences? Or do explanations drive the human sciences in a manner akin to their more venerable natural-scientific cousins? These questions fueled the decades-old Methodenstreit (“methodological dispute”) about the foundations of the social sciences. Rising above the fray, McCauley has long endorsed interactionism, according to which interpretations and explanations of the same cultural-symbolic phenomenon are complements rather than competitors. He contrasts interactionism with exclusivism, which holds that only one of these approaches is applicable to cultural-symbolic phenomena, and inclusivism, which subordinates explanation to interpretation. However, all three of these positions assume that there is a nontrivial distinction between interpretation and explanation. By contrast, I will argue that putative examples of interpretations that defy explanation rely on overly restrictive conceptions of causation, lawlike generalizations, or perspective-taking in the natural sciences. As a result, all cultural-symbolic phenomena should be explained, though different explanations of those phenomena are still mutually beneficial in the ways that interactionism suggests.

  continue reading

292 afleveringen

همه قسمت ها

×
 
Loading …

Welkom op Player FM!

Player FM scant het web op podcasts van hoge kwaliteit waarvan u nu kunt genieten. Het is de beste podcast-app en werkt op Android, iPhone en internet. Aanmelden om abonnementen op verschillende apparaten te synchroniseren.

 

Korte handleiding