ABSTRACT
0000-0001-8721-7066
Throughout the previous two chapters emphasis was placed on the importance of both theoretical abstraction and intellectual synthesis, and the development of foundational, sensitizing concepts alongside broader master narratives for the revitalization of the classical sociological imagination in the field of criminology. This chapter builds on and develops further these initial core claims by making a closely related set of arguments for methodologically rigorous scientific explanation, whilst recognizing the significance of the ‘hermeneutic turn’ in the social sciences. In doing so the chapter addresses Bottoms’ (2008) ‘tough challenge’ of integrating in a coherent fashion both a search for causes and explanation, and an emphasis on understanding the meaning of social actions for actors. The discussion begins by identifying three key intellectual fault-lines in much contemporary social scientific thinking about the relationship between theory, method and evidence, and seeks to offer a resolution of these limitations by means of an engagement with ‘adaptive-realist’ methodological practice. The afore-mentioned three fault-lines are as follows: (i) the widespread ‘disconnection’ between questions of theory, method and empirical research; (ii) more specifically to the field of criminology, the widespread ‘disconnection’ with general social theories in much mainstream criminological research; and (iii) the widespread suspicion about, if not abandonment of, the quest for scientific explanation in much sociological-qua-critical research-theorizing. Arising out of this examination the following claims are made, namely that (i) the ‘connection’ between theory, method and research needs reaffirming; (ii) criminological research in particular can gain much from reconnecting with general social theories; (iii) the quest for causal explanation regarding social processes should not be abandoned, and that broadly realist principles can help reshape the substantive research-theorizing in criminology. Having made this three-pronged argument, the fourth part of the chapter establishes the methodological claims underpinning adaptive-realist research practice and in particular the relative strengths and limitations of extensive and intensive research strategies and designs. The fifth part of the chapter explores the all too often hidden routine practices, technical devices and ‘tricks of the trade’ employed by sociological researchers in the challenging evidential field of study inhabited by criminology. How, in other words, are different types of evidence ‘captured’ and brought to life? In doing so I revisit Mills’ (1959/2000) essay ‘On intellectual craftsmanship’ and attempt to excavate and bring to life the all too often hidden routine working methods of practitioners of the classical sociological imagination, focusing on the research labour undertaken by Weber and Elias in their two most influential empirical investigations. And finally I consider how might future advances be made through the fusing of the best contemporary and classical methodological practices.
