Abstract: 

Methodological anti-naturalists insist that social scientists sometimes have to make use of methods th at are distinct from those used within the natural sciences. Proponents of this view often claim that distinct methods are indispensable to find out about norms. Moreover, they often use participant observation as one principal way in which to gather data. In this talk, I examine whether the use of participant observation to find out about norms does indeed lend support to methodological anti-naturalism. I begin by explicating and exemplifying how social scientists make use of participant observation to find out about norms. Then I ask whether this examination speaks in favor of the anti-naturalist claim.  I argue that various arguments, relying on different conceptions of methods, fail to establish that the methodological anti-naturalist is right. By way of ending, I briefly discuss why we should take an interest in this classic question within the philosophy of the social sciences as to whether distinct methods are sometimes indispensable when doing social science.  

Hosted by the Research Unit for Epistemology, Metaphysics, and Philosophy of Cognition