Fundamental Demands on the Construction of a Theoretical Object of Strictly Scientific Empirical Studies of Literature

Abstract

When we start out from the assumption that theories can never adequately represent an unknowable realm of stimulators of our senses, this implies the construction even of the objects themselves of scientific empirical theories, which is here taken to be wholly dependent on practically relevant explanatory purposes for the advancement of practical capacities only. This also means that explanatory empirical theories alone can be scientific empirical theories in a strict sense, whereas descriptive empirical theories, as implying the assumption of some fundamental substance-construct, may only be justified within science insofar as they fulfill an adequate service function of some required data acquisition. This article, being also based on the constructivist point of view that there is no independent object of knowledge at all, consists for a large part in a sketch of a sequence of object-constructs as resulting from different and successively more effective ways of making attempts at survival in the evolution of mankind and the development of its social practice. The object-construct of scientific empirical explanatory theories as the latest of them is here conceived as empirical practical quasi-action with the function of enabling new know-that for the improvement of practical capacities in various fields of our highly specified practice. As special kinds of empirical practical quasi-actions for a future fruitful construction of objects of scientific empirical explanatory theories are here proposed: process (in a narrow sense), origination of meaning, and origination of a practical action. It must be understood as a “political” decision when the author intends to develop an object-theory of scientific empirical studies of literature as that of originations of a kind of communicative cooperative practical actions.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Sneed

J. D.

, The Logical Structure of Mathematical Physics, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1979.

Kuhn

T. S.

, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1962.

Holzkamp

, Wissenschaft als Handlung—Versuch einer neuen Grundlegung der Wissenschaftslehre, de Gruyter, Berlin, 1968.

Maturana

H. R.

and Varela

F. J.

, Autopoiesis and Cognition, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1980.

Stegmüller

, Theorie und Erfahrung, Bd. II, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1973.

Stegmüller

, The Structuralist View of Theories, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1979.

Wallack

F. B.

, The Epochal Nature of Process in Whitehead's Metaphysics, State University of New York Press, Albany, 1980.

Kaulbach

, Philosophie der Beschreibung, Böhlau, Köln/Graz, 1968.

Albert

, Probleme der Theoriebildung. Entwicklung, Struktur und Anwendung sozialwissenschaftlicher Theorien, in Theorie and Realität, Albert

(ed.), Mohr, Tübingen, pp. 3–70, 1964.

10.

Kant

, Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1781 and 1787), Felix Meiner, Hamburg, 1956.

11.

Nierlich

, Die deduktiv-nomologische Erklärung als Hauptmotiv empirischwissenschaftlicher Tätigkeit, Erkenntnis—An International Journal of Analytic Philosophy, XXIX, pp. 1–33, 1988.

12.

McLuhan

and Fiore

, The Medium is the Massage, Random House, New York, 1967.

13.

von Glasersfeld

, Konstruktivistische Diskurse, LUMIS-Schriften 2, Siegen, 1984.

14.

von Glasersfeld

, Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit und des Begriffs der Objektivität, in Einführung in den Konstruktivismus, Gamin

and Mohler

(eds.), Oldenbourg, München, pp. 1–26, 1985.

15.

Nierlich

, Was heißt es, eine empirisch-wissenschaftliche Theorie zu konstruieren?, Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie-Journal for General Philosophy of Science, XVII, pp. 295–314, 1986.

16.

Holzkamp

, Sinnliche Erkenntnis—Historischer Ursprung und gesellschaftliche Funktion der Wahrnehmung, Athenäum-Fischer, Frankfurt, 1973.

17.

Quine

W. V. O.

, The Roots of Reference, Open Court, La Salle, Illinois, 1973.

18.

Mill

J. S.

, A System of Logic Ratiocinative and Inductive (1843), in Collective Works VII and VIII, Toronto University Press, Toronto, 1973/1974.

19.

Aristotle , The Complete Works of Aristotle, 2 vols., Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984.

20.

Quine

W. V. O.

, Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, Columbia University Press, New York, 1969.

21.

Diels

, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Rowohlt, Hamburg, 1957.

22.

Popper

K. R.

, Die offene Gesellschaft und ihre Feinde, Francke, München, 1980.

23.

Kaulbach

, Der philosophische Begriff der Bewegung-Studien zu Aristoteles, Leibniz und Kant, Böhlau, Köln/Graz, 1965.

24.

Whitehead

A. N.

, Process and Reality, Macmillan, New York, 1929.

25.

Reck

A. J.

, Process Philosophy, a Categorical Analysis, Studies in Process Philosophy II—Tulane Studies in Philosophy, XXIV, pp. 58–91, 1975.

26.

Kirchhoff

, Vorlesungen über mathematische Physik 1: Mechanik, Teubner, Leipzig, 1877.

27.

Nierlich

, Wissenschaftstheoretische Überlegungen zu einer praxisentfaltenden empirischen Literaturwissenschaft, in Analytische Literaturwissenschaft, Finke

and Schmidt

S. J.

(eds.), Vieweg, Braunschweig, pp. 203–239, 1984.

28.

Nierlich

, Das Literarische—Vorstellung des Konzepts einer literaturwissen-schaftlichen Gegenstandstheorie als Planung für eine Theoriekonstruktion, Siegener Periodicum zur Internationalen Empirischen Literaturwissenschaft, II, pp. 183–207, 1983.