The aim of this article is to argue for a conception of critical social science based on the model of constitutive rules. The author argues that this model is pragmatically superior to those models that employ notions like “illusion” and “ ideology,” as it does not demand a specification of the “real (but hidden) interests” of social actors.
Austin, J. L.1956/1990. Aplea for excuses. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society57:1-30. Reprinted in Classics of analytic philosophy, edited by R. Ammerman, 379-98. New York: Hackett.
2.
Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender trouble. New York: Routledge.
3.
Comstock, Donald E.2001. Amethod for critical research. In Readings in the philosophy of social science, edited by M. Martin and Lee C. McIntyre, 625-639. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4.
Dreyfus, Hubert. 2001. Phenomenological description versus rational reconstruction. Revue Internationale de Philosophie55 (217): 181-196.
5.
Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2001. Making social science matter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1971. Knowledge and human interests. Boston: Beacon.
7.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1998. The philosophical discourse of modernity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
Hacking, Ian. 1999. The social construction of what?Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
Kuhn, Thomas. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10.
Rawls, John. 1955. Two concepts of rules. Philosophical Review64 (1): 3-32.
11.
Ruben, David-Hillel. 1997. John Searle's The construction of social reality. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research57 (2): 443-447.
12.
Searle, John. 1969. Speech acts. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Searle, John. 1995. The construction of social reality. New York: Free Press.
14.
Taylor, Charles. 1985a. Interpretation and the sciences of man. In Philosophy and the human sciences: Philosophical papers 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
Taylor, Charles. 1985b. Social theory as practice. In Philosophy and the human sciences: Philosophical papers 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Wisnewski, J. Jeremy. 2002. Assertions, clarifications, and recommendations: Theories of agency in a Wittgensteinian key. American Philosophical Quarterly39 (2): 35-152.
17.
Wisnewski, J. Jeremy. 2003. Five forms of philosophical therapy. Philosophy Today47 (1): 53-79.
18.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1954. Philosophical investigations. New York: Macmillan.
