Social Constructionism and Empirical Researchability

Abstract

The metaphor of "social construction" is currently in vogue in social analysis. Consequently, the term "construction" becomes increasingly polysemous & ambiguous. Besides being an idea that implies methodological guidelines for social research, it now has epistemological implications that endorse a certain line of social criticisms. In order to assort the present discussions on "social construction" & to make my own methodological points, I use the concept of "empirical researchability." However, being empirical is not so simple a matter nowadays. Regarding the ways to conceptualize empirical researchability, both the positivist orthodoxy & interpretive alternatives have been criticized from various camps. The major difference in their methodological understandings can be categorized as (1) understandings that entail epistemological (& sometimes ontological) "folding backs," & (2) understandings that do not. The contrast between the two types of understandings becomes clearer when their approaches to the issues such as fact/value distinction & reflexivity are closely examined. For a research program to be empirically researchable, I argue that it should focus on methodological understandings that do not "fold back" (such as those of ethnomethodology). Even for enterprises of applied sociology & critical sociology, being empirical is a serious matter unlike some recent postmodern arguments, & the empirical constructionist inquiry that I propose should have important implications for those enterprises. 42 References. Adapted from the source document.