Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Heikki Patomäki claims, in ‘After Critical Realism?’, that Roy Bhaskar's early critical realism is inadequate to the contemporary natural and social sciences. He claims that Bhaskar defends anthropomorphic conceptions of causality; fails to recognise real change; and fails to underlabour for futures studies. These claims are based on a series of misunderstandings, notably about the nature and implications of underlabouring. Underlabouring is discussed in terms of the disclosure and transformation of the deep categorial structures of science and theory.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nick Hostettler (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: