Phronesis and the participants' perspective

Abstract

Comments on the book, Real Social Science: Applied Phronesis edited by Bent Flyvbjerg, Todd Landman and Sanford Schram (2012). In Making Social Science Matter, Bent Flyvbjerg proposed a radical challenge to positivistic versions of social inquiry and rational choice. Social inquiry according to Flyvbjerg is not really a 'science'. The latter, he claimed had roots in the notion of episteme or what Aristotle viewed as certain and reliable knowledge. Flyvbjerg viewed this type of knowledge as 'theoretical'. As realized in modern nomological views of science, particulars are subsumed and governed by general laws. In contrast to this nomological version of social inquiry, Flyvbjerg claimed that knowledge of the social world was phronetic in Aristotle's sense. It is practical, context bound, and independent of theoretical knowledge. Phronesis required the wisdom, insight and skill of an interested participant in social life. Real Social Science introduces the idea of tension points to emphasize the need to confront power. A tension point is a turning point in a power constellation. Real Social Science represents a promising approach to a practically oriented social research, but, to redeem that promise, phronetic inquiry needs to develop a critical approach to power that links understanding power to the reflexive ability of participants. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)