چکیده:
The growth of empirical sciences and its impact on human life has caused some to think about demarcating between science and non-science. With the formation of the Vienna Circle, methodological discussions took on a formal character; however, thinkers associated with this circle, by limiting science to empirical sciences and setting aside other forms of knowledge, considered observation and hypothesis testing as the way to attain science. The scope of this view extended to the human sciences, and some approached the study and research of human issues with this approach. With the works and thoughts of thinkers such as Popper, Kuhn, and Lakatos, the extreme form of this view was moderated, and empirical science moved from a purely empirical state toward humanization. In terms of methodology, Habermas's works can be divided into two periods: the first period is dedicated to the critique of the Frankfurt School, the reconstruction of Marx's views, and the methodological critique of positivism, providing a pragmatic foundation for the second period or the 'linguistic turn' period, which led to the theory of communicative action. In this article, the authors attempt to explain his epistemological ideas regarding the human sciences while presenting and analyzing Habermas's theoretical achievements in the first period.
خلاصه ماشینی:
In terms of methodology, Habermas's works can be divided into two periods: the first period is dedicated to the critique of the Frankfurt School, the reconstruction of Marx's perspective, and the critique of the methodology of positivism, providing a pragmatic foundation for the second period or the period of the "linguistic turn," which led to the theory of communicative action.
Habermas, even when lamenting the decline of this model in contemporary times, emphasized its liberating and ideal potential, but other theories of communication consider his model to be a specific historical and class-based conception of ideal public communication which, in the general sense of the word, is a type of ideology (Mortensen, 1977).
The broadest concept of the historical model of the public sphere and its systemic counterpart in the theory of communicative action (Habermas, 1981/1984) is that, in general, society can be contemplated and evaluated from a position outside of any social context of self-interested action.
Critique of Positivist Methodology In his book "Knowledge and Human Interests," Habermas demonstrates how positivism has limited our understanding of the natural and social world and weakened the possibility of critique.
Habermas wants to lay the foundation for a social theory that is critical, empirical, and scientific, (1) positivistic self-understanding (2) scientism without being reduced to the natural sciences.
Thus, it can be said that the positivist conception of scientific method, knowledge, and the critique of tradition is ultimately a specific response to a fundamental socio-political question in advanced industrial societies, namely the question regarding the relationship between technical progress and the social world.
(
, 
, 
)
