Generative hermeneutics: proposal for an alliance with critical realism

References

• Apel, K.-O. 1979. Die Erklären: Verstehen Kontroverse in transzendentalpragmatischer Sicht. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, M. S. 1995. Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, M. S. 2003. Structure, Agency and Internal Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, M. S. 2007. “The Long March with a Key Problem: Can Explanation and Understanding Be Linked?” In Race Relations, Immigration and Sociological Theory: Essays in Honour of Professor John Rex, edited by T. Abbas and F. Reeves, 61–76. London: I. B. Tauris.
   Google Scholar
• Archer, M. S., ed. 2010. Conversations About Reflexivity. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, U., A. Giddens, and S. Lash. 1994. Reflexive Modernization. Cambridge: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Bhaskar, R. 2005. The Possibility of Naturalism. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bhaskar, R. 2008. A Realist Theory of Science. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bollnow, O. F. 1967. Dilthey. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer.
   Google Scholar
• Danermark, B., M. Ekström, L. Jakobsen, and J. Ch. Karlsson. 2002. Explaining Society. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dilthey, W. 1981. Der Aufbau der geschichtlichen Welt in den Geisteswissenschaften. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Dilthey, W. 1990. “Beiträge zum Studium der Individualität.” In Die Geistige Welt. Einleitung in Die Philosophie des Lebens, edited by W. Dilthey, 241–316. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   Google Scholar
• Donati, P. 2011. Relational Sociology. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Donati, P., and M. S. Archer. 2015. The Relational Subject. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Figal, G. 2006. Gegenständlichkeit. Tübingen: Mohr & Siebeck.
   Google Scholar
• Gadamer, H.-G. 2004. Truth and Method. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. 1976. New Rules of Sociological Method. London: Hutchinson.
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. 1986. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Gorski, P. S. 2015. “Causal Mechanisms: Lessons from the Life Sciences.” In Generative Mechanisms Transforming the Social Order, edited by M. S. Archer, 27–48. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Grondin, J. 2001. Von Heidegger zu Gadamer. Darmstadt: WBG.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. 1987. The Theory of Communicative Action II. Boston: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hedström, P., and P. Bearman. 2009. “What is Analytical Sociology All About?” In The Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology, edited by P. Hedström and P. Bearman, 3–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hempel, C. G. 1942. “The Function of General Laws in History.” The Journal of Philosophy 39 (2): 35–48. doi: 10.2307/2017635
   Google Scholar
• Hollis, M., and S. Smith. 1994. “Two Stories about Structure and Agency.” Review of International Studies 20 (3): 241–251. doi: 10.1017/S0260210500118054
   Google Scholar
• Husserl, E. 1983. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
   Google Scholar
• Mahoney, J. 2001. “Review: Beyond Correlational Analysis: Recent Innovations in Theory and Method.” Sociological Forum 16 (3): 575–593. doi: 10.1023/A:1011912816997
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popper, K. R. 1994. Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon.
   Google Scholar
• Reed, I. 2008. “Justifying Sociological Knowledge: From Realism to Interpretation.” Sociological Theory 26 (2): 101–129. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9558.2008.00321.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed, I., and J. C. Alexander. 2009. “Social Science as Reading and Performance.” European Journal of Social Theory 12 (1): 21–41. doi: 10.1177/1368431008099648
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rickert, H. 1926. Kulturwissenschaft und Naturwissenschaft. Tübingen: Mohr & Siebeck.
   Google Scholar
• Ricoeur, P. 1990. Soi-même comme un autre. Paris: Édition du Seuil.
   Google Scholar
• Ricoeur, P. 1991. “Explanation and Understanding.” In From Text to Action, edited by P. Ricoeur, 125–143. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ricoeur, P. 1992. One Self as Another. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Riedel, M. 1980. Verstehen oder Erklären. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
   Google Scholar
• Sayer, A. 1992. Method in Social Science. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sayer, A. 2000. Realism and Social Science. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Skovajsa, M. 2013. Struktury významu. Prague: SLON.
   Google Scholar
• Von Humboldt, W. 1960. “Über die Aufgabe des Geschicchtschreibers.” In Schriften zur Anthropologie und Geschichte, edited by W. Von Humboldt, 585–606. Berlin: Rütten & Loening.
   Google Scholar
• Von Wright, G. H. 1971. Explanation and Understanding. London: Routledge & Keagan.
   Google Scholar
• Wight, C. 2015. “Mechanisms and Models: Some Examples from International Relations.” In Generative Mechanisms Transforming the Social Order, edited by M. S. Archer, 49–64. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Winch, P. 2008. The Idea of Social Science. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Windelband, W. 1921. “Geschichte und Naturwissenschaft.” In Präludien, edited by W. Windelband, 136–131. Tübingen: Mohr.
   Google Scholar