UC Berkeley

This dissertation analyzes the emergence of an alternative form of inquiry to that which has dominated the Anglophone social sciences for over half a century. Examining the philosophies of Leo Strauss, Alasdair MacIntyre, and Charles Taylor, it ultimately seeks to vindicate a humanistic and interpretive approach to the study of politics against the ongoing tendency towards mechanistic and pseudo-scientific forms of explanation.

An introduction gives readers the necessary background context for understanding the importance of these controversies. The contributions of Strauss, MacIntyre, and Taylor are to be understood in light of an intellectual, cultural, and political movement which I describe as "positivism." Because this form of positivism continues to be of great influence today, the contributions of these three political philosophers also remain relevant.

The first part of the dissertation treats the work of Strauss. Chapters 1 and 2 argue that Strauss's critique of social science, while marking an important first wave of resistance against positivism, nevertheless falls short. Although Strauss identifies some of the key problems with mainstream social scientific inquiry, his alternative remains inadequate.

The second part of the dissertation examines MacIntyre's and Taylor's respective critiques of social science. Chapters 3 through 6 argue that these two philosophers have successfully criticized modern social science, while also proposing a viable, interpretive alternative. These chapters also argue that MacIntyre and Taylor provide us with an approach to social science that overcomes the supposed dichotomy between facts and values. Rather than dichotomizing empirical and normative inquiry, MacIntyre and Taylor each devise novel ways of joining empirical research with moral and political reflection.