فصلنامه روش شناسی علوم انسانی
پیاپی 102 (بهار 1399)

Criticisms of the dominant paradigms of the science, especially the positivism and the interpretive paradigms, have intensified efforts to find alternative paradigms. One of the paradigms that has emerged in this regard is critical realism. This paradigm has created a reconciliation between the two rival paradigms by borrowing ontology from positivism and epistemology from interpretivism. Critical realism claims that can lead us to deeper understanding of the phenomena and it`s generative mechanisms by stratified ontology of it, that considers reality in three empirical, actual and real layers. But despite of the positive role of this paradigm in better understanding of the phenomena, methodology of it is still unclear and a few researches have been done in this paradigm. Therefore, in this article, after introducing the concepts, assumptions and theoretical foundations of critical realism, an attempt has been made to study its methodology from the perspective of different researchers. Finally, a practical example of research conducted under the banner of this paradigm is described to shed light on research in critical realism.

The history of culture in Iran has been studied and researched in the framework of historical and sociological knowledge, but the cultural approach to historical categories and subjects does not have much history. "Cultural history" as a scientific approach derived from interdisciplinary studies has become relatively coherent over the past three decades. This event is the result of the accumulation of historians' experiences and the confrontation of contemporary methods and theories and its integration with other sciences, especially cultural studies, anthropology and cultural anthropology. Combining the methods of historical studies with other sciences, especially the social sciences, provided the basis for "historiography" to move away from its traditional methods and give way to "historical research." The diversity of "subject" and "method" in historical studies can be seen more than anywhere else in the important and influential works written in the second half of the twentieth century.give way to "historical research." The diversity of "subject" and "method" in historical studies can be seen.

This article aims at suggesting a new account of the distinction between basic and applied research which I call the functionalist account. In nearly all science and technology policy documents, the distinction is drawn in terms of the linear model of innovation which is not historically adequate. Upon the two conceptions of science representation and design plan, this new account discards the priority of basic over applied research which the linear model is based on. Instead, the functionalist account focuses on the social aspects and the context of use in which the final and intermediate outcomes of research are understood. To support this new account, I will next briefly review the development of transistor at Bell Telephone Laboratories in the middle of the twentieth century. Finally, some research and education policy suggestions of this account will be considered.

The nature of research in the field of education is mainly dynamic, unpredictable, and multidimensional; However, the majority of the existing research methods have a linear and staggered structure, which are merely pre-tailored to the prevailing research approach. This research is aimed to introduce the emerging research method, which is the forefront horizon in education research methodologies. The nature of this method is first analyzed using a descriptive method. Subsequently, the necessity of this method is presented according to the specific requirements of research in the field of education. The results show that the timely nature of the education process, the importance of individual differences, and the necessity of the empathy between the researcher and the human variables involved in the research are not fully considered in current education research methodologies; This is while the emerging research method, with its non-linear and unregulated structure, is adaptive to various educational situations, and by not limiting the researcher in the process steps, can well consider these aspects during the research.

Common sense realism and scientific realism are two metaphysical thesis. The former accepts the existence of the observable entities of common sense knowledge and the later accepts the unobservable entities necessary for the well-established scientific theories. Common sense realism and scientific realism are defended or rejected by some philosophers with reliance on the evolutionary approach. Studying these arguments shows there are positive evidences to the advantage of both subjects; realism and anti-realism, But skeptical consequences of evolutionary approach to science is a source for a new idea to specify science and to develop the scientific epistemology. In this article، in addition to investigating the above local reasonings to the advantage of Van Fraasson's evolutionary explanation will be adopted for science and scientific epistemology growth on the basis of specifying evolutionary; the third position which between realism and belief in miracle is in specifying the success of science. In this approach, the evolutionary approach, the production of resistant and abiding models is the main goal of science and philosophy and the scientific realism is also one of the abiding models.