INSTYTUT SOCJOLOGII

DR HAB. RICCARDO CAMPA

The aim of this course is to familiarize students with the philosophical dilemmas characterizing the scientific study of society. The philosophy of the social sciences will be intended as that branch of the philosophy of science focused on human and social sciences such as anthropology, sociology, economics, political science, historiography, and law. Major attention will be paid to the philosophy of sociology.

30 hours (second semester/ two hours a week), "konwersatorium" with final exam. The lecturer will present one topic of the program in the first hour and will require the participation of students in a free discussion in the second hour.

Students will be asked to attend the course regularly and to participate actively by taking part to the discussions and by presenting a topic in class. At the end of the course, they will be asked to pass a written examination. Those who fulfill these requirements will obtain a sign for the attendance, a mark for the exam, and 5 points ECTS.

The course is set up in a general introduction and two main parts. In the introduction I shall present and discuss the main approaches of the philosophy of science in the twentieth century (i.e. logical positivism, critical rationalism, methodological anarchism, etc.). Then we will turn our attention to the main philosophical dilemmas which seem to be specific of the social sciences: the methodological dilemma concerning the status of the social sciences (sciences or humanities?), the epistemological dilemma concerning the attitude of the social scientist to the object of study (detachment or bias?), the ontological dilemma of the reality of social phenomena (collectivism or individualism?), the empirico-theoretical dilemma of the social sciences (constructing total theories of society or analyzing micro-phenomena?), the ethico-political dilemma of the social sciences (describing society or changing society?). We shall see that it is possible to overcome these dilemmas by following a "third way" of social analysis. In this respect, Piotr Sztompka’s theoretical work will be our major focus of attention. In the second part, we shall read and interpret more specific philosophical problems of anthropology, sociology, economics, political science, historiography, and law. Insightful studies of these social sciences have been produced by philosopher Mario Bunge. We will make systematic use of Bunge’s philosophical work. Particular attention will be paid to sociology and to the methodological strategy based on the construction of middle range theories. Essays (or fragments) by Rudolf Carnap, Max Weber, Robert K. Merton, Arnold Rose, Ernest Nagel, Steven Lukes, Alfred Schulz and others will be analyzed in order to emphasize consensus and controversy in the field.

1. Sztompka P. (1979), Sociological Dilemmas. Toward a Dialectic Paradigm, Academic Press: New York.
2. Bunge M. (1998), Social Science under debate. A Philosophical Approach. Toronto University Press: Toronto.

 

Monographic works:

3. Campa R. (2001), Epistemological Dimensions of Robert Merton’s Sociology (Chapter 3), Copernicus University Press, Torun.
4. Carnap R. (1956), "Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology", in Meaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantics and Modal Logic, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
5. Mandelbaum M. (1973), "Societal Facts", in Alan Ryan (ed.), The Philosophy of Social Explanation, Oxford University Press, Bristol.
6. Merton R. K. (1968 A), "Theories of the Middle Range", in Social Theory and Social Structure, The Free Press, New York.
7. Merton R. K. (1968 B), "The Self-fulfilling Prophecy", in Social Theory and Social Structure, The Free Press, New York.
8. Nagel E. (1973), "Assumptions in Economic Theory", in Alan Ryan (ed.), The Philosophy of Social Explanation, Oxford University Press, Bristol.
9. Rose, A. M. (1954 A), "Responsibility of the Social Scientist", in Theory and Method in the Social Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis..
10. Rose, A. M. (1954 B), "A Basic Methodological Issue in Sociology: Problem Orientation versus Method Orientation", in Theory and Method in the Social Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
11. Schultz A. (1973), "Problems of Interpretive Sociology", in Alan Ryan (ed.), The Philosophy of Social Explanation, Oxford University Press, Bristol.
12. Taylor C. (1973), "Neutrality in Political Science", in Alan Ryan (ed.), The Philosophy of Social Explanation, Oxford University Press, Bristol.
13. Weber M. (1949 A), "The logic of the cultural sciences" , in The Methodology of the Social Sciences, The Free Press, Glencoe (Illinois).
14. Weber M. (1949 B), "The meaning of "Ethical Neutrality"", in The Methodology of the Social Sciences, The Free Press, Glencoe (Illinois).

1. General philosophy of science: Campa (2001, chapter 3), Carnap (1956).

1. The Methodological dilemma: Sztompka (1979, Chapter 2), Rose (1954 B).
2. The Epistemological Dilemma: Sztompka (1979, Chapter 5), Weber (1949 B).
3. The Ontological Dilemma: Sztompka (1979 Chapter 7), Mandelbaum (1973).
4. The Empirico-Theoretical Dilemma: Merton (1968).
5. The Ethico-Political Dilemma: Sztompka (1979, Chapter 4), Rose (1954 A), Merton (1968).

1. Philosophy of Positive Economics: Bunge (1998, chapter 3), Nagel (1973).
2. Philosophy of Historiography: Bunge (1998, chapter 6).
3. Philosophy of Political Science: Bunge (1998, chapter 4), Taylor (1973).
4. Philosophy of Culturology (or Anthropology): Bunge (1998, chapter 5).

1. Philosophy of Linguistics: Bunge (1998).
2. Philosophy of Law: Bunge (1998, chapter 8).
3. Philosophy of Sociology (1^st part): Bunge (1998, chapter 2).
4. Philosophy of Sociology (2^nd part): Schulz (1973), Weber (1949 A).
5. Philosophy of Sociotechnology: Bunge (1998, fragment p. 297-305, chapter 11).

 [ Back ] [ Home ] [ Up ] [ Next ]

Copyright 2004-2011 © Riccardo Campa