Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

During much of the twentieth century, the dichotomy between verstehen (interpretive understanding) and erklären (causal explanation) helped frame the debates about the epistemological foundations, purposes, and methods of the social sciences (→  Research Methods ). Similar in many respects to the nomothetic/idiographic controversy (→  Idiographic vs Nomothetic Science ), the key issue was whether it is possible – or desirable – to achieve unity between the natural and social sciences. The concept of verstehen , in particular, posed a challenge to this idea of unification. By the end of the twentieth century, the coexistence of multiple forms of inquiry had become an accepted state of affairs in all of the social sciences, including communication research, and dampened the urgency of this issue. However, the legacy of the verstehen / erklären dichotomy lives on in the worldviews and practical activities of scholars. In such realms as the methods they use, the theoretical traditions they uphold, and the curricula they teach, there can still be found the imprint of the split between interpretive inquiry and causal explanation. The verstehen / erklären debate originated during the rise of positivist social science in the nineteenth century. Informed by the empiricist philosophies of John Locke and Francis Bacon, and especially by David Hume's arguments about causation and the ... log in or subscribe to read full text