Reclaiming Reality (Classical Texts in Critical Realism

by Roy Bhaskar

Originally published in 1989, Reclaiming Reality still provides the most accessible introduction to the increasingly influential multi-disciplinary and international body of thought, known as critical realism. It is designed to "underlabour" both for the sciences, especially the human sciences, and for the projects of human emancipation which such sciences may come to inform; and provides an enlightening intervention in current debates about realism and relativism, positivism and poststucturalism, modernism and postmodernism, etc.

Elaborating his critical realist perspective on society, nature, science and philosophy itself, Roy Bhaskar shows how this perspective can be used to undermine currently fashionable ideologies of the Right, and at the same time, to clear the ground for a reinvigorated Left. Reclaiming Reality contains powerful critiques of some of the most important schools of thought and thinkers of recent years--from Bachelard and Feyerabend to Rorty and Habermas; and it advances novel and convincing resolutions of many traditional philosophical problems.

Now with a new introduction from Mervyn Hartwig, this book continues to provide a straightforward and stimulating introduction to current debates in philosophy and social theory for the interested lay reader and student alike. Reclaiming Reality will be of particular value not only for critical realists but for all those concerned with the revitalization of the socialist emancipatory project and the renaissance of the Marxist theoretical tradition.

Genres: Philosophy, Science

240 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1989

About the author

Roy Bhaskar (born May 15, 1944) is a British philosopher, best known as the initiator of the philosophical movement of Critical Realism.

Bhaskar was born in Teddington, London, the elder of two brothers. His Indian father and English mother were Theosophists.[1]

In 1963 Bhaskar began attending Balliol College, Oxford on a scholarship to read Philosophy, Politics and Economics. Having graduated with first class honours in 1966, he began work on a Ph.D. thesis about the relevance of economic theory for under-developed countries. This research led him to the philosophy of social science and then the philosophy of science. In the course of this Rom Harré became his supervisor.

Reviews

[Stef Rozitis · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am still chewing over the thoughts in this book. I have to agree that the positivists don't have it quite right and nor do the relativists. Much of what Bhaskar says in critiquing this school of thought or that I have to admit I agree with him on.

At times the text is hard to read, and while I am happy to acknowledge that sometimes people are smarter than me (and Bhaskar very likely is) I think sometimes also he is too busy using long words and latin phrases and such instead of being clear. His use of pronouns is very strange and I will try to give him the benefit of the doubt that his intentions are good in this...but it doesn't come across well. The chapter that is full of diagrams and strange equations was the hardest one to understand and I felt sometimes he had things the wrong way around- giving us a lot of argument about transative and intransative early on and only late in chapter 8 explaining what he actually meant by the terms.

Then his critique of Rorty...while I agreed with everything Bhaskar said his depiction of Rorty was as of someone taking drugs and raving weird things, I was surprised that so much earnest argument was needed to unpick ideas like the one about being able to predict the sounds people will make in the future (in detail) but not the content or meaning. That seemed like a 3am stoned "I am so creative and philosophical" idea from Rorty in the first place (assuming my reading of Bhaskar's reading of Rorty is fair on both levels) and I would have thought a hollow laugh and move away to talk to the much more interesting feminist at the other end of the room would have been an adequate answer (that is how I usually handle the drunk self-important "philosophers" anyway). But the good thing about the detail in which Bhakar engaged with Rorty is that in doing so he made his own position all the more clear.

I have about 12 pages of typed notes and reflections from reading this book and it may well be something I use for my thesis- so despite not having exactly enjoyed my way through it, I'd have to agree with all the people who see some significant thinking within it. And I am sure it was very "good for me" to struggle through it ;)

[Domhnall · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book, first published in 1989, brings together nine essays or articles on diverse topics. To a large extent, they can be read as recapitulating his 1975 account of "A Realist Theory of Science," which is helpful in clarifying the key themes of that work, while demonstrating that his account supplies a powerful analytical tool by which to approach a range of topics, the most important being his discussion of the basis for social science.

He clearly believes that his thinking contributes to argument in support of the political Left and against the political Right. There are specific targets and topics for which this is doubtless the case. I personally would incline to the view that this is not terribly significant for the purpose of these essays; many people with political allegiance to "the Right" would still be interested in his analysis. Put another way, why say anything that sustains the idea that people on the Right and on the Left simply occupy separate worlds and avoid read each others' books? Also, why give the impression that Bhaskar's ideas are dogmatic when they are the opposite?

More generally, this book is really most likely to benefit academics and students. As a civilian, I found it frustrating to read - some essays more so than others. Despite the topicality and evident value of his approach, which really is exciting by the way, I feel that his own writing in these essays is far too dense and opaque to serve a wide audience and he clearly needs the mediation of a more accessible writer.

Exciting ideas and imaginative thinking waiting for a comic book version? That might well work.

[FluffyNyctea]

Graeber’s fav philosopher, and I must say, dude, I get it!!!!

[John NM · Rating 3 out of 5]

At times incredibly useful and clarifying (eg transitive vs intransitive, the inversion of the ontological questions/implications of science), but much of the time incredibly difficult and opaque. Most likely will benefit from multiple readings, but who has the time.

[Ivan Labayne · Rating 3 out of 5]

ang daming sabi-sabi tungkol sa parang malalaking bagay tulad ng tanaw, sakop, layunin ng science, ugnayan ng mga bodies of knowledge tulad ng natural sciences at human sciences atbpang che che. advisable bitbitin kung dadalo ng isang linggong conference kasama ang mga di-feel o di-close o di-kakilalang mga scholar.