ABSTRACT
In Part 3 of this work concerned with the philosophical grounding of a subjectivist-interpretive methodology of the human sciences I am adopting, as in Part I, an essentially dialectical strategy of argument. I build up the philosophical defence by considering first the broad positive arguments in favour of the subjectivist approach (thesis stage), then I move on to consider what methodologies of human science are definitively ruled out as invalid by those same basic philosophical arguments (the antithesis stage) and finally I return to reassert and to present in detail the principles of a subjectivist-interpretive methodology. The strand of unity running through this dialectical discussion of methodology is provided by existentialist phenomenology with its notion of human subjectivity which I have outlined at length in the last chapter, along with a preliminary indication of how it points to the imperative of a subjectivist-interpretive methodology.
