Re: [Critical-Realism] rts2-11

[BD_wanika <bwanika@xxxxxxxxx>]

  Sociologically, ?error? is debatable in generation of knowledge or information or new social activities. Different schools of thought, in sociological research, derive fundamental differences, as a result of errors in misconstruing social activities and society. Methodologically, one section of sociologists, prefer monological deduction  (empiricism hence positivism/ sociometrical approach) while another group, prefer induction (hermeneutical / explanatory / a linguistic approach) in sociological analysis.
           However, none of the above methodological approach, provides tangible solutions in solving  -  errors in urbanised societies,  given that the two approaches have fundamental errors in scientific  research. 

Economist too,  use the same approaches, in solving third world problems but with little success!
     Instead the approaches generate complex errors namely; 
     a.     Methodological disposition leading to ?instrumentalism? and its Freudian sociopsycho logical approach.
  b.     Society is viewed as components of different competing organs ending in social democratic approach of waged labour.
  c.      Applied sociology, finally losses track of  sociological issues.In turns  endless philosophical disputes emerge. 
    Sociologically, it?s now well understood that human beings need space. Space can be defined in terms of ?free will? and away from state control. The same approach, proposed by environmental scientist or evolution biologist but entirely misinterpreted by naturalists. 
     Certainly, past errors in doing science about society generated the ?errors? above. However, in present social setting, it is ideally difficult for a fly to be shown a way out the bottle.
     As I read Jan and Tobin?s discussion, I will proposal another view, which is contrary to the behavioural science approach, that human beings are overtly not adaptive as it is assumed.  

Sociologists, who talk about anomie and deviance, realise that urban and industrial societies are fundamental errors.
     And all that has been done in the past, is trying an error to solve an error!
     I would like to learn more about ?error? for as I understand the discussion, Marx is the only person in social sciences that has completely offered a different approach to error knowledge problematics which approach unfortunately is inapplicable. 
     On the other hand, shouldn't we as, how could the green peace movement be possible if error was a possible solution? I?m ready to learn more about ?error?.
      I might have understood the entire discussion.   

Bwanika.
  
       
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your freeaccount today.
_______________________________________________
Critical-Realism mailing list
Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism