I. R.

I've been meaning to read up on Critical Realism - in particular Roy Bhaskar's A Realist Theory of Science, for some time. I tried to read a bit of it in the library a few weeks ago and failed miserably - it's clearly not the kind of thing that you can just dip in and out of. Besides it's got horrid sciencey words in it. I hope to find some time to teach myself critical realism once I finish that goddamarsewank thesis thingy. All I know at the moment is that I like what I know about critical realism - at least it seems to advance a broad philosophical outlook that I'd be comfortable with - which is to say, in other words, that it appears to confirm/bolster my prior held philosophical prejudices/comfort blankets.

In basic terms, a Critical Realist perspective allows you to curl your lip at both positivists and empiricists (lab-coated, 'cost benefit analysis' touting philistines) on the one hand and Nietzscheans (evil scary people) on the other.

There's a really good and reasonably accessible debate here between Bhaskar and Callinicos.