Critical Analysis of Rationality Governing the Philosophy of Human Sciences from Charles Taylor's Point of View

IntroductionThe significance of the humanities in contemporary human life has led to increased interest and scrutiny. However, diverse definitions and foundations within the field have resulted in confusion and ambiguity regarding its impact and meaning. One effective way to address these challenges is to revisit its philosophical foundations and redefine them. Charles Taylor, as a prominent contemporary thinker, has provided a distinctive reading of these foundations, which has become a cornerstone for Western humanities. This paper aims to explore the nature of the rationality governing the philosophy of humanities from Taylor's perspective.Research Question(s)What is the rationality that governs the philosophy of the humanities from Charles Taylor's perspective? Literature ReviewSeveral articles have been written in Iran regarding Charles Taylor, reflecting the diversity of topics due to his engagement with various discussions. These can be broadly categorized within the realm of Taylor's post-structuralist thoughts and their practical extensions, particularly in the fields of ethics and spirituality, which are among his areas of expertise. Notable articles include "Charles Taylor's Thoughts on Ethical Philosophy" (Haider Shadi: Farhang Letter, No. 53), "Recognizing Cultural Differences in Public Life: An Examination and Critique of Charles Taylor's Theory" (Seyed Mohammad Ali Taghavi: Mofid Letter, No. 44), "Ethics of Authenticity" (Fatemeh Sadeghi: Methodology of Humanities, No. 30), "The Consequences of Modernity for Spirituality: A Critical Examination of Charles Taylor's Views" (Vahid Sohrabi Far and Bagher Talebi Darabi: Sociological Studies, No. 23), "Human-Centeredness, the Heart of Secularism: A Comparative Study of the Views of Professor Javad Amoli and Charles Taylor" (Zahra Davarpanah and Saeed Binayi Motlagh: Social Theories of Muslim Thinkers, No. 1), "Charles Taylor's Reading of Authenticity and Its Implications in Defining an Authentic Teacher" (Mostafa Moradi: Philosophy of Education, No. 5), "A Critique of Harry Frankfurt's and Charles Taylor's Views on Human Agency Based on Islamic Theory of Action and Its Implications for Education" (Mohammad Reza Madani Far et al., Research Journal of Educational Foundations (Educational and Psychological Studies in Mashhad) Vol. 6, No. 1), "Moral Self-Following from the Perspective of Taylor's Ethics of Authenticity and Its Considerations in Education" (Marzieh Aali and Mohammad Ravanbakhsh: Philosophy of Education Vol. 3, No. 2).Additionally, the article "From Explanation to Critique: A Critical Examination of James Bohman's and Charles Taylor's Views on the Relationship Between Science and Values in Social Sciences" which does not address ethical issues or spirituality (Hamed Bekran Behesht: Methodology of Humanities, No. 112), only generally discusses the relationship between values and science, specifically within a part of the humanities—namely social sciences—without delving into fundamental philosophical discussions.In foreign literature (non-Persian), several credible articles were found that, although they share some similarities with the topic of this research, cannot be considered significant precedents due to fundamental differences between them. Below are these articles along with explanations and their differences:"Rationality and the Human Sciences: A Taylorian Perspective" Author: Michael J. Thompson Published in: Human Studies Year: 2015 This article examines the concept of rationality from Taylor’s perspective, emphasizing that rationality in the humanities must go beyond limited rational criteria and positivism. The author analyzes the role of language and culture in shaping rationality, asserting that rationality should be understood within its social and historical context. Difference: This article emphasizes the concept of rationality but focuses more on cultural and social influences without delving into a deeper analysis of the philosophy of humanities."The Challenge of Rationality in Human Sciences: A Taylorian Critique" Author: Sarah L. Smith Published in: Journal of Philosophical Inquiry Year: 2018 This article critiques rational approaches in the humanities from Taylor’s perspective, addressing their challenges. The author examines the limitations of positivist rationality and behaviorism, emphasizing that rationality must encompass an understanding of human meanings and intentions.Difference: While this article critiques existing approaches, it does not engage in a foundational analysis of the rationality governing the philosophy of humanities; instead, it focuses more on practical challenges.The subject of the present research on the rationality that governs the philosophy of the humanities from the perspective of Charles Taylor is pristine and without precedent due to its focus on fundamental and a priori analysis in this field. Although the articles introduced criticize and examine the approaches to rationality in the humanities, none of them specifically analyze rationality and the philosophy of the humanities fundamentally. This indicates the innovation and importance of this research in the field of philosophy of the humanities. MethodologyThis research employs a qualitative methodology with an interpretive approach, focusing on analytical-critical insights derived from primary sources authored by Charles Taylor in Latin. The aim is to extract Taylor's views on rationality governing the philosophy of humanities directly from his works, ensuring accurate interpretation and analysis. Discussion Taylor’s defense of interpretivism contrasts sharply with naturalistic approaches that attempt to model human actions based on natural sciences:- He asserts that human actions are inherently meaningful and intentional, distinguishing them from mechanical explanations typical in natural sciences.- The critique extends to behaviorism, which neglects the agent's intentions and meanings behind actions.- This dualistic view highlights challenges in establishing a comprehensive methodology for humanities that effectively addresses human behavior's complexities. ConclusionThe present research on the rationality governing the philosophy of the humanities from the perspective of Charles Taylor is pristine and without precedent and background due to its focus on fundamental and a priori analysis in this field. Although the articles introduced criticize and examine rationality approaches in the humanities, none of them specifically analyze rationality and the philosophy of the humanities in a fundamental way. This indicates the innovation and importance of this research in the field of philosophy of the humanities.Taylor criticizes positivist and behaviorist approaches by emphasizing the specificity of the humanities and its close connection with our definition of ourselves. He believes that theorizing inevitably affects and changes our understanding of ourselves and our worldview. This view of his indicates the fundamental differences between the humanities and natural sciences, because the goal of natural sciences is to explain phenomena objectively and impartially, while the humanities cannot be impartial and objective.Taylor emphasizes that human actions have implicit meanings and that explanation in the humanities involves understanding these meanings. He defends the dichotomy between natural and human-social sciences and rejects the unity of method. His critique of naturalism in the humanities suggests an interpretive or hermeneutic approach as the appropriate methodology for this field.Finally, this research shows that in order to achieve a comprehensive approach to the study of the humanities, it is necessary to pay more attention to the meanings, intentions, and cultural contexts of human actions. By criticizing the modeling of human behavior based on natural sciences, Taylor emphasizes the importance of teleological explanation. Therefore, understanding the rationality that governs the philosophy of the humanities from Taylor’s perspective not only helps to redefine this field but also offers solutions to face the existing challenges.This research clearly shows that adopting an interpretive and hermeneutic approach to the study of the humanities can lead to a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of human behavior. Given the complexities of human behavior and the need to understand its implicit meanings, new approaches must be considered to respond to the challenges in this field.The method used in this research is qualitative, with an interpretative approach and with an analytical-critical view (method).According to Taylor, the rationality governing the philosophy of human sciences is not an inconsistent and contradictory concept or even a critical attitude, but rationality includes something more than avoiding inconsistency and beyond a formal concept. Therefore, he proposes a pragmatist view of his understanding of rationality, that is, the more technologically advanced society is, the more rational it is. In fact, Taylor's emphasis is on the language of eloquent comparison and the world of common reference and pragmatist rationality, and this is the ideal philosophical basis of humanities in his opinion. (Findings)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.