首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Psychology >Does Postmodernism Really Entail a Disregard for the Truth? Similarities and Differences in Postmodern and Critical Rationalist Conceptualizations of Truth, Progress, and Empirical Research Methods
【24h】

Does Postmodernism Really Entail a Disregard for the Truth? Similarities and Differences in Postmodern and Critical Rationalist Conceptualizations of Truth, Progress, and Empirical Research Methods

机译:后现代主义真的需要忽视真相吗?后现代和批判性理性主义概念化的异同和差异,进展和经验研究方法

获取原文
           

摘要

Within this article, I will compare postmodernist and critical rationalist conceptualizations of epistemological key concepts such as truth, progress, and research methods. An analysis of Gergen’s program for a postmodern psychology shows that a naïve positivist understanding of truth is clearly incompatible with his postmodernist approach, whereas a correctly understood falsificationist use of truth as a guiding ideal may not be. However, postmodernists are often content with a diversity of voices as the endpoint of scientific activities, whereas critical rationalists such as Popper would put more emphasis on attempts to reach a common understanding. The differences between critical rationalists such as Popper and Deutsch and postmodernists such as Gergen are more complicated when it comes to conceptualizations of progress: Whereas postmodernists do not deny the existence of some forms of progress such as technological innovation, they argue that the modernist grand narrative, which views Western culture and the corresponding technological revolutions as being equal to epistemological and societal and political progress per se, has become untenable. Debates on possible negative consequences of modern technology are one example of evidence for this. Here, critical rationalists tend to engage in a legitimization discourse sensu Lyotard and to defend Western culture with all its deficiencies as a necessary precondition for evolutionary epistemic as well as societal and political progress, although they would agree with large parts of the postmodern critique of modernism. Postmodernists and critical rationalists would both agree that psychology as a field would benefit greatly, among other things, from a transition from a methods-oriented approach to scientific knowledge to a more problem-oriented approach, and from less methodological dogmatism. Taken together, postmodernism and critical rationalism may not be as irreconcilable as it may seem at first glance.
机译:在本文中,我将比较后现代主义者和关键理性主义概念的认识性关键概念,如真理,进展和研究方法。对Gergen的后现代心理学计划的分析表明,天真的实证主义对真理的理解与他的后现代主义方法显然不相容,而正确理解的伪造案例使用真理可能不是这样的。然而,后现代主义者通常是具有多样性的声音的内容作为科学活动的终点,而Popper等批判性理性主义者将更加重视达成共同理解的尝试。当涉及进步的概念化时,诸如Popper和Deutsch和Deutsch和Deutsch和后现代主义者(如Gergen)之间的差异是更复杂的:而后现代主义者不否认存在某种形式的进展,如技术创新,他们认为现代主义盛大叙事,这与西方文化和相应的技术革命相同为等于认识论和社会和政治进展,已经无法维持。关于现代技术可能的负面后果的辩论是此证据的一个示例。在这里,批判性理性主义者倾向于从事合法化话语Sensu Lyotard,并以其所有缺陷为捍卫西方文化,作为进化认知和社会和政治进步的必要先决条件,尽管他们会同意现代主义后现代主义的大型批判。后现代主义者和关键的理性主义者都同意,作为一个领域的心理学将从其他方面受益于从一种以方法为导向的方法转变为更令人满意的面向的方法,以及较少的方法论教条主义。在一起,后现代主义和批判性理性主义可能不会像乍一看那样不可调和。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号