A Tale of Two Ontologies: An Immanent Critique of Critical Realism 1

Abstract

In this article is it argued that critical realism has two mutually exclusive definitions of ontology. Ontology is defined as both a fallible interpretation of reality and as a definitive definition of a reality beyond our knowledge claims. A slippage in meaning occurs from the former to the latter, as critical realists try to justify the claim that their ontology ought to supply the terms of reference for all scientific research. Rather than defend an alternative ontology, it is argued that ontology needs to be defined in terms of fallible interpretations of social reality. This necessitates the revision and replacement of ontological theories in the course of an ongoing critical dialogue about reality, and precludes the use of one fixed ontology to supply the terms of reference for the sciences. ²