The Relationship between Anthropology and Methodology in the Paradigms of Positivism and Critical Realism

The present paper examines and comments on the anthropological and methodological foundations of two paradigms of positivism and critical realism and their influence on one another. An argumentative-demonstrative method is used in this paper to demonstrate the idea that the components of each paradigm in an epistemic system are logically related and the acceptance of every component necessitates the acceptance of the other components. Since the paradigm of positivism has a mechanical attitude about man, it adopts a model taken from natural sciences in its methodological foundations, appeals to a kind of descriptive method as a reliable method free from value and considers quantitative method to be sufficient. On the other hand, since the paradigm of critical realism considers man to have a social identity, it considers the presuppositions agreed upon by individuals in communicative action as one of the important elements of its methodological judgment in its method and since it has a realistic concern, it considers practical adequacy as another element of its methodological judgment. For gathering the data, this paradigm combines quantitative and qualitative methods and considers that neither of them can be sufficient by itself.