Sociology Plus
Critical Realism Definition
Critical realism emerged from debates in the philosophy of science during the 1970s, notably involving thinkers such as Harre and Madden and Bhaskar. It posits that while laboratory experiments can isolate causal relationships within artificial closed systems, genuine social reality is constituted by complex, stratified structures operating within open or variable systems. This approach argues that natural science methods are designed to explain the tendencies of these structures, rather than simply describing isolated causal laws. Consequently, critical realism suggests that reality can be analytically distinguished into these underlying structures, the outcomes of their complex interplay, and human experience or interpretation of those outcomes, offering a way to reconcile theory with the rest of reality in a manner distinct from idealism or materialist empiricism.
Philosophical Foundations
Critical realism attempts to bridge the gap between scientific explanation and lived experience by asserting that neither idealism (reality is mind-dependent) nor materialist empiricism (reality consists solely of external objects of sense perception) adequately accounts for the nature of natural science methods, which can both succeed and fail. It proposes a form of philosophical naturalism where reality is understood as a continuous interplay between theoretical research programmes and the actualisation of social activity. This framework acknowledges that while structures possess causal powers, these powers are practically and conceptually dependent in ways different from those observed in the natural sciences.
Relevance to Social Science
Although initially seeming less relevant to the social sciences, critical realism has gained significant influence in sociology and social theory, particularly in the UK, Scandinavia, and the US. It provides a philosophical justification for why positivism may be inappropriate as an account or method within natural science, thereby undermining the universal application of positivist assumptions to social phenomena, such as those relying heavily on statistical prediction. Furthermore, it offers an alternative to certain forms of strong relativism in constructivist and postmodernist theories by adapting the depth realist argument to societies. The core conceptual challenge in applying this approach socially is that human society, unlike physical systems, involves variability where change holds a different significance than in meteorological systems, and there is no direct analogue to the laboratory for empirical testing.
Agency and Structure
A central focus within critical realism is resolving the agency-structure problem. It rejects theories of methodological individualism and structuralism by arguing that while human action is central to social reality, reducing it solely to individual beliefs fails to account for how goals are constrained or how unintended consequences arise. The favoured solution involves an analytical dualism where agency and structure are recognised as distinct yet mutually dependent. Structures are viewed as the enduring conditions and outcomes of human activity; they provide the relational authority and rules that set in motion consequences, yet these powers are exercised through individual actions. This perspective suggests that society is a set of continually reproduced, transformed relations, where agents act within the background provided by these structures to produce events that cannot be reduced solely to individual perception.
Key Developments and Critiques
The development of critical realism has involved significant scholarly debate. Margaret Archer was instrumental in developing a distinctive approach to the agency-structure problem, critiquing Giddens’s dualism by emphasising the temporal precedence of structure over agency. Other scholars have refined the concept of structure, with thinkers like Rom Harre focusing on the limitations of causal powers within structures, and Lewis differentiating between material causes and efficient causes. The field remains diverse, with ongoing debates concerning the appropriate relationship between science and social theory, the value of research methods (such as analytical statistics), and the precise nature of structural reality.