IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eur/ejisjr/270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Positivist Misconceptions of Science and the Search for Viable Solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Chompalov Ivan

    (Edinboro University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.)

  • Lubomir Popov

Abstract

Prevailing current definitions of science are largely based on a traditional, positivist paradigm that favors the natural sciences and either denies or downplays the scientific status of the social sciences and the humanities. The disciplinary organization and institutionalization of research and systematic inquiry is still the norm. This article argues that the rigid organization of science and indeed the dominant view that there are hard sciences and soft sciences with the latter occupying an inferior position with regard to their knowledge claims and utility is pretty outmoded and does not fit well the current challenges and global needs. This is not just an academic issue but has clear practical implications in terms of funding and staffing, as well as the distribution of other valuable resources, especially in view of the dwindling federal and state funding for both the natural sciences and the humanities and social sciences. We develop our argument using as a methodological platform the ideas of ‘The Two Cultures,’ the ‘Science Wars,’ the new constructivist turn in social studies of science, and science as a social institution. We argue that current definitions of science need to be modified to include the humanities and to emancipate the social sciences and the ‘soft’ paradigms associated with them. This can form the basis of an earnest effort for better integration of different kinds of disciplines and for achieving much needed synergisms to tackle complex problems that tend to be multifaceted and whose solutions do not easily conform to single disciplinary paradigms. The contention here is that such a bridge between the two cultures can use as a model the social sciences, since they successfully combine methods from the natural sciences with approaches and theories common in the humanities. In our opinion, this is a feasible path to both greater interdisciplinarity and more vigorous collaboration between the different branches of science that can benefit both working scientists and society at large when dealing with pressing issues like environmental problems, the depletion of natural resources, pandemics, and natural disasters.

Suggested Citation

  • Chompalov Ivan & Lubomir Popov, 2021. "Positivist Misconceptions of Science and the Search for Viable Solutions," European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 7, January -.
  • Handle: RePEc:eur:ejisjr:270
    DOI: 10.26417/867rqe28x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://revistia.org/index.php/ejis/article/view/5349
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://revistia.org/files/articles/ejis_v7_i1_21/Chompalov.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26417/867rqe28x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eur:ejisjr:270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Revistia Research and Publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://revistia.org/index.php/ejis .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.