Auguste Comte (positivist)

Auguste comte (1798-1857) was a French philosopher, and the founder of the sociology; it studies
society in a scientific way. Before the emergence of sociology, there was no systematic and scientific
attempt to study human society with all its complexities. Sociology has made it possible to study
society in a scientific manner. Auguste comte coined the term ‘’positivism’’ which is collectively
founded by the bacon, Descartes, and Galileo. Hence empiricism, which he called positivism and
positive philosophy – which means ‘’ anyone who made real contribution to the science’’ he terms
positivism. Science is not all the time objective, but it is subjective also in which laws are all the same
cannot be changed and moulded; perhaps they are constant who define the world.

Further, Auguste comte argued that all the theories, concepts or entities that are incapable of
being verified empirically must be solved from scientific explanations. The aim of scientific
explanations is prediction, rather than trying to understand a noumenal realm that lies beyond our
sense and, is thus unknowable. Science seek uncovers the laws of governing relations between
observed phenomena, of which gravity and newton’s law of motion exemplary. Hence human
behaviour must obey laws just as strict as newton’s laws of motion, and that if we could discover them,
we would eliminate more evils. The unity of scientific method, arguing that natural and social sciences
should both adopt a positivist approach. Perhaps, Comte formulation of sociological methods in which
he explains; how are facts about social world to be gathered and used to develop, as well as to test,
theoretical principles? How to solve problems, find solution etc. so the naturalism and materialism
are the basis of natural science. In which he begins with the nature as reality, in which natural facts
are philosophical materialism as the basis, Galileo, Descartes, newton. For comte the simple collection
of facts was not enough’’ facts cannot be observed without the guidance of some theory’’. In social
facts we apply reasons and in natural facts we apply cause / causality. In Natural facts; there are
potentiality and actuality and Natural facts existing as a thing or an event in space and time with cause
and effect relationship without imagination and imitation.

In order to explain the scientific methods; a growing phenomenon; Auguste comte in 19 th

century connect the naturalism with positivism; which advocates use of the scientific method
of the natural sciences in studying social sciences. Auguste comte says the method in science
is a continuous process, a method or procedure, that has characterized natural science since
17th century. Natural science tends to produce consent regarding theories are valid. Given this
evident; many philosophers and social theorists have been eager to import the method of
natural science to the study of the social world. If social science were to achieve the
explanatory and predicative power of natural science, it could help solve vexing social
problems, such as violence and poverty, improve the performance of institutions and
generally foster human well-being. Those who believe that adopting the aims and methods
of natural science to social inquiry is both possible and desirable support the unity of scientific
method, such as advocacy in this context also referred to as naturalism. Further he explains
the scientific method of natural science consist in; I) systematic observation- which is
purposeful perception. Observation can be structured and unstructured, in structured or
systematic observation data collection is conducted using specific variables and according to
pre-defined schedule. And unstructured observation is conducted in an open and free manner
in a sense that there would be no pre- determined variables or objectives. Ii) measurement,
iii) experiment- are the processors designed to test hypothesis iv) the formulation, test and
modification; the best hypothesis lead to prediction that can be tested in various ways. Thus,
people are naturally inquisitive, so they often come up with questions about things they see
or hear, and they often develop ideas or hypothesis about why things are the way they are.
And to relate known to unknown experiences.
Similarly, in the relation of above passage, Auguste comte talks about theory of Descartes
on truth- clearness and distinctness to make the theories clearer. I) never accept anything as
true; void precipitance and prejudices. Include in judgement only what presented itself so
clearly and distinctly present to the mind. Ii) Examining difficulties in many parts as possible
in order to solve it and to conduct the thoughts in orderly way begin with the simplest object
in order to climb to the more complex. Indeed, in social reality there is no finality and no
absolute essence because we have no absolute knowledge of phenomena thus, that is
relative. Similarly, we know no essence but know their relation to the other facts. Hence these
relations are constant.
Comte offered an account of social evolution, proposing that society undergoes three phases
in its quest for the truth according to a general 'law of three stages'.
1-Theological stage, 2) metaphysical stage, and 3) positive stages
In theological stage, human beings rely on super natural agencies to explain what they cannot
explain otherwise. It gives the knowledge of world, which is original and spontaneous form of
thought, regards the facts of the universe. The universe is not governed by nature and laws,
there is one desire who is created the world. Universe is governed by single and direct
volitions of beings, god could be real and imaginary, possessed of life and intelligence which
comes in various stages such as; in the infantile state of reason and experience, individual
objects are looked upon as animated.
The conception of invisible beings, each of whom superintends and governs an entire class of
objects or events.
The multitude of divinities in a single god, who made, the whole universe in the beginning,
and guides and carries on its phenomena by his continued action.
Thus, theology remain a challenge for scientists and social- scientists. Humanity was infantile
at the stage of theology, the beginning of humans from mythos (creation of the world, man
in the image of god) to logos (word, rationality etc).

2) metaphysical stage; in this stage human beings attribute effects to abstract but poorly
understood causes. In this stage it is no longer a god that causes and directs each of the
various agencies of nature: it is a power, or a force, or an occult quality, considered as real
existences, inherent in but distinct from the concrete bodies in which they reside, and which
they in a manner animate. Then, Wilhelm Dilthey discusses the Plato’s; theory of forms and
ideas. Beginning of metaphysics, first theory of ideas used by Plato’s and forms used by
Aristotle later. Ideas are not invented by us they are universal. Plato argued that the theory
of ideas and forms represent the most accurate reality as they are not physical but substantial.
3) positive stage; human beings now understand the scientific laws that regulate and control
the natural and social reality. i) maturity of humanity, facts and data, phenomenon, no
finality, and no essentialism. Thus, Auguste comte did not clear distinction between society
and science. Science is an institution in the society it is bound to affect and affected by its
social values. Science is affecting us everywhere, science and technology helps us in building
and infrastructure, production, safety and security.

Wilhelm Dilthey (Hermeneutic)

According to Wilhelm Dilthey the philosophy is defined as ‘’an experiential science of spiritual
phenomena’’ that seeks to ‘’ cognize the laws governing social, intellectual and moral
phenomena’’. Philosophy should aim to preserve the scope that idealist such as Fitche,
Schelling ang Hegel once gave it, but it must do so by recapturing the Kantian rigor of science,
morals and art that had been lost and by applying it empirically. Wilhelm Dilthey main work
is ‘’hermeneutics’’. Which is defined in many aspects such as; 1) according to Greek,
mythological deity hermeneutics (messenger god between the god and between the gods and
mortals -Greeks believes in interpretation, finding meaning in the written word. 2) according
to Aristotle work on interpretation, -to deal with the relationship between language and logic.
3) biblical mount Sinai where Moses interpreted the Jewish law- the truth-to the people-
historically, hermeneutics has been associated with the interpretation of biblical texts.
Perhaps, Aristotle argues that language follows rules like grammar. He first shows difference
between language and logo. Language is the first identity it is affectionate to us, it gives
affinity through that it gives diversity. Language follows certain laws and laws of logic. So, the
interpretation in mythology direct access to god’s mind but there is a relation between
language and logic which you have, through that the knowledge which comes out. According
to Wilhelm Dilthey the ‘’hermeneutics’’ in theology means the interpretation of the spiritual
truth of the bible. It is said that Jesus interpreted himself to the Jews in terms of spiritual
prophecy. In philosophy the term hermeneutics first used by Dilthey to denote the discipline
concerned with the investigation and interpretation of human behaviour, speech, etc. as
essentially intentional.
In order to explain the hermeneutics Wilhelm Dilthey, explain it into 3 phases; i) It was
characterized by a search for inner explanation. Ii) by direct understanding iii) it can be
characterized by the need for interpretation. All 3 phases are not distinguished from each
other, they do complement to each other. The 3rd phase is most important, because
hermeneutics is the art of interpretation.it need to be interpret, it is the inner intelligibility of
lived experience. The way we express ourselves, whether in communication, or in action, is a
crucial intermediary in defining ourselves. Thus, we understand ourselves not through
introspection but through history. So, Wilhelm Dilthey, says the history is the way, we
interpret it-the way we understand our self.
 Further, he explains difference between natural and human science. We explain this
concept through purely intellectual process, but we understand through the cooperation of
all the power of the mind activated by apprehension. Wilhelm Dilthey, says in natural science
we do inference; its main task is to arrive at law-based causal explanation. David Hume says
there is a problem of induction, something is undesirable in past, but it does not mean we will
accept in future. For e.g.; in human science we create different resistance. Whereas human
science is the understanding of the organisational structures of human and historical life.
Indeed, Wilhelm Dilthey says our initial access to the external world is not to will. the world
of lived experience is not merely a theoretical; representation, but it is directly to us as
embodying values that are relevant to our purposes. like; freedom is embodied in the family,
then it goes to the community, society, and in the world; political and economic blocks control
our freedom, so freedom is embodied in all the institutions, that is human objectification. The
stress on feeling and immediacy in this second phase amounts to a rejection of Hegel’s
dialectical approach.
Indeed, social sciences comes with in human science, because there is a range of human
and social sciences. The range from disciplines like, philology, literary and cultural studies,
religion and psychology, to political science and economics. Wilhelm Dilthey says human
sciences is not related to the logical construct on the order of a comte or a mill, but by means
of reflective consideration, there is self-reflection and it can reflect only past or historical
aspect. There is a problem of reflective, because social science talk about self-reflective
activity. So self-reflective is historical in nature. In relation to explain further he explains
history and historicity. ‘’history enables man to grasp the meaning of his own nature as
objectified in his own past’’. Hegel says history is made by humans, it gives meaning to the
present; it has i) subjective spirit; comprises of thought, idea, etc ii) objective spirit comprises
with the institutions. Iii)absolute spirit the final spirit, art and religion. Historicity; something
happens in the society, there is a chain of development – Plato, Hegel, and Marx. Historical
events take place due to certain reason/causes, with an inherent purposiveness, from
primitive stage to socialism. For Hegel, there is reality; reason is enabling and elevating,
reason is which is critique of reason so reason has subjectivity and predictivity in the critique.
Further Wilhelm Dilthey, explains causal explanations are not sharp in the human science as
in the natural science. Dilthey, aim was to expand Kant’s primarily nature-oriented critique
of pure reason into a critique of historical reason that can-do justice with the social and
hermeneutics dimensions of human experience. Kant primarily oriented; will, freewill,
goodwill, and holly will. Will means desire for an action, Kant says freewill begins with
philosophy, which means you can decide which operates in the society but goodwill is above
freewill. Kant says goodwill is inherent self-reflective. thus, our life is only with the freewill
and goodwill. And the holly will be something which god has, but people don’t have. So, it is
simply an idea which god has. Thus, Kant’s notion of social phenomena can be explained by
freewill and goodwill. Therefore, Dilthey admired Hegel’s recognition of the historical
dimension of philosophical thought, but rejected speculative and metaphysical ways he
developed this relation.
There are three classes of human science ;1) its descriptive and historical statements 2)
theoretical generations about partial contents, means we have partial content, but we
generalize it. 3) evaluate judgments and practical rules, first we preserve the norms then have
dialogue. Perhaps, human science is normative in nature rather than natural science for which
formal norms related to objective inquiry suffice. Human science given core role that human
beings play in the socio-historical world.

Critique and conclusion

What are the problems with positivist and hermeneutics of social science?
Auguste comte talks about the positive philosophy and scientific methods or laws that
regulated to control the natural science. And Wilhelm Dilthey theory is based on the
hermeneutics. In the above passages we saw each one has different approaches towards the
social science. Auguste comte talks about the freedom but freedom cannot be tested in the
labs, Kant says there is difference between freedom and causality. Dilthey developed a
typology of the three basic World-Views, which he considered to be "typical" (comparable to
Max Weber's notion of "ideal types") and conflicting ways of conceiving of humanity's relation
to Nature. In Naturalism, represented by Epicureans of all times and places, humans see
themselves as determined by nature. In the Idealism of Freedom (or Subjective Idealism),
represented by Friedrich Schiller and Immanuel Kant, humans are conscious of their
separation from nature by their free will. In Objective Idealism, represented by G. W. F. Hegel,
Baruch Spinoza, and Giordano Bruno, humans are conscious of their harmony with nature.

Conclusion
Therefore, positivist and hermeneutics prospective, there is one similarity, that they both
support the historical aspects. Thus, the meaning of life is embodied in the institution only.
The history is the way human understands its meaning, philosophical ideas have to be there.
The dimensions of historical facts are date (objective concerned), place or locality, and
effect/causality, it requires interpretation. That is created by human being. Positivist and
hermeneutics are both right at their places they both are contributing to the social science in
their own way.
SUBJECT - PHILOSOPHY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE

TOPIC- DISCUSS THE POSITIVIST AND

HERMENEUTICS PROSPECTIVES ON SOCIAL
SCIENCE.

Date; 27-02-18
Submitted by- kavita singh
Centre- centre for philosophy
School- SSS I
 Outline of the paper
I have divided my paper in 4 sections which are the followings;
 First section; the Auguste comte define the role of positive philosophy and
scientific methods or laws in the social science.
 Second section; the Wilhelm Dilthey describes the role of hermeneutics,
human science in social science.
 Third section; criticism
 Forth section; conclusion