• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The International journal of drug policy >Critical realism and the 'ontological politics of drug policy'
【24h】

Critical realism and the 'ontological politics of drug policy'

机译：批判现实主义与“药物政策的本体政策”

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This article explores the question of what we can consider to be real in drug policy. It examines two increasingly common aspects of drug policy analysis; radical constructionist critique and successionist data science. It shows how researchers using these assumptions have produced interesting findings, but also demonstrates their theoretical incoherence, based on their shared 'flat ontology'. The radical constructionist claim that reality is produced within research methods - as seen in some qualitative studies is shown to be unsustainably self-defeating. It is analytically 'paralyzing'. This leads to two inconsistencies in radical constructionist studies; empirical ambivalence and ersatz epistemic egalitarianism. The Humean successionist approach of econometric data science is also shown to be unsustainable, and unable to provide explanations of identified patterns in data. Four consequent, limiting characteristics of this type of drug policy research are discussed: causal inference at a distance, monofinality, limited causal imagination, and overly confident causal claims. The article goes on to describe the critical realist approach towards 'depth ontology' and 'generative causation'. It provides examples of how this approach is deployed in critical realist reviews and discourse analysis of drug policy. It concludes by arguing that critical realism enables more deeply explanatory, methodologically eclectic and democratically inclusive analysis of drug policy development and effects.
机译：本文探讨了在药品政策中我们认为什么是真实的问题。它考察了毒品政策分析中两个越来越常见的方面；激进的建构主义批判和继承主义数据科学。它展示了研究人员如何使用这些假设产生了有趣的发现，但也展示了他们基于共享的“平面本体论”的理论不一致性。激进的建构主义者声称，现实是在研究方法中产生的——正如在一些定性研究中所看到的那样，这被证明是不可持续的自我挫败。从分析角度来看，这是“瘫痪”。这导致了激进建构主义研究中的两个矛盾；经验主义的矛盾心理和假认知的平均主义。计量经济数据科学中的休谟进化论方法也被证明是不可持续的，并且无法对数据中确定的模式提供解释。本文讨论了这类药物政策研究的四个结果性、局限性特征：远距离因果推断、单终局性、有限的因果想象和过于自信的因果主张。文章接着描述了对“深度本体论”和“生成因果关系”的批判现实主义方法。它提供了如何在批判性现实主义审查和毒品政策话语分析中运用这种方法的例子。文章最后指出，批判性现实主义能够对毒品政策的发展和影响进行更深入的解释、方法上的折衷和民主上的包容性分析。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号