ABSTRACT
To understand more clearly the critiques of the particular theories of composition presented here, an adequate understanding of Bhaskar’s critiques of competing theories of natural science and their implications for the human sciences is needed. Bhaskar begins his project of critical realism with a twopronged approach: the first is to present immanent critiques of the current theories of natural science; the second is to propose, based on the problems exposed through these immanent critiques, what the world must be like in order for science and scientific practice to be valid. Before I present a positive account of critical realism, I will examine some of the competing philosophies of science, fleshing out their underlying assumptions. Then I will discuss the weaknesses in these philosophies of science that Bhaskar’s immanent critiques exposed, thus setting the grounds for discussing critical realism.
