后实证主义

Question

Recall that one of the basic debates in the theoretical approaches to the alleged end of the modernist period and the slide or break into the post-modernist period is that of the possibility of a unifying overall truth, of unifying overall enlightenment, of a unifying overall metanarrative that could tell the ultimate "truth" for humans. Positivists, trained in scientific method, trained to trust their own objectivity (which is, of course, challenged by their opponent theorists), trained to believe that there is some ultimate "reality" out there which

Critical theorists and postmodernists, postmarxists, deconstructionists reject the metanarrative, the story that could encompass the "truth" for us all, reject the objectivity claimed by the positivists, focussing on the extent to which the science to which we allude is the product of multiple perspectives, multiple agendas, and many of the unstated assumptions of privilege. Across this huge continuum there are many different theoretical schools, most of whom find it impossible or unproductive to "even talk to each other," resulting in splinter groups that degenerate into a public that has lost the will to discourse, as well as the skills to engage in effective public discourse. At least the positivists are still talking to each other.

The focus of our postmodern section on this site is the skills and efforts needed to bring us to the discourse table, for we agree with Habermas that public discourse is essential to our ability to live in this world in peace. One example of the problems posed is given by Steve Epstein in Impure Science, a study of the conflict of agendas in AIDS research.

Answer 1

还记得，一个基本的辩论中的理论方法被指控的结束和现代时期的幻灯片或进入后现代时期是有可能的一个统一的整体真理，统一整体的启示，在一个统一的整体metanarrative ，可以告诉最终的“真相”的人。实证主义，科学的训练方法，训练，相信他们自己的客观性（这是当然，挑战自己的对手理论家） ，培训，认为有一些最终的“现实”有这些

批判理论家和postmodernists ， postmarxists ， deconstructionists拒绝metanarrative的故事，可以包括“真相”对我们大家来说，拒绝的客观性所主张的实证主义，重点在何种程度上的科学，我们提到的产品多的观点，多个议程，以及许多未假设的特权。在这一巨大的统一体有许多不同的理论所学校，其中大多数认为不可能或非生产性的“甚至互相沟通” ，导致分裂集团的蜕化成一个市民，已经失去了意志，话语，以及技能进行有效的公共话语。至少在实证主义仍互相交谈。

我们的研究集中在现代节关于这个站点是的技能和努力，需要给我们带来的话语表，因为我们同意哈贝马斯的公共话语是必不可少的能力，我们生活在这个世界上的和平。一个例子造成的问题是由史蒂夫爱泼斯坦在不纯科学，研究冲突的议程在艾滋病的研究。