Theoretical strategies of studying social action: Causal Explanation vs Meaning Understanding

Abstract

This article deals with epistemological clash between positivistic and intentionalistic programs in the social sciences. The main question raised here is whether a social action can be comprehended in both causal and motivational terms, which is stressed to be necessary condition for the consistency of the social sciences. Basing on theoretical analysis of scholars' writings on the issue, we can stress that exactly such an approach resolves a number of problems implicit to contemporary theories of action. The main profit it suggests to theoretical sociology may be said to be as follows: it enables imputing the deed to a concrete actor. To achieve this aim we need to elaborate a theoretical language accounting for action as both factual (that is the event with causally accountable antecedents and consequences) and meaningful, intentional event. For that purpose the idea of dawning an aspect suggested by Wittgenstein in PI is employed. The article is divided into several parts. In introductory section the problem is specified in general terms. The first part deals with historical reconstruction of epistemological dualism between Kulturwissenschaften and Naturwissenschaften which led to a later clash between intentionalistic and causaliatic approaches to social action. Then the model of singular causality is examined and criticized as far as it cannot suggest a theoretically viable criterion for separation of valid and invalid descriptions of action. The concluding part suggests the decision of the problem basing on Wittgensteinian metaphor of changing the aspect.