Knowledge of the natural and the social: how are they different and what do they have in common?

Abstract

Knowledge of the natural and the social are irreducibly different yet have much in common. The differences lie at the levels of complexity they engage, modes of explanation they adopt, investigation aims they allow and whether they assert a ‘double hermeneutic’ effect to the behaviour of the studied objects. Knowledge are in common in that they are all construed out of available resources, justified based on the consequences of acting upon them, settled until better alternatives emerge, and serving as walking sticks for beating unknown paths in human life. Because of this, there can be no hierarchy of knowledge or unity of methodology, and dialogical encounters guided by situational ethics, not professional deafness driven by ontological/instrumental fallacies, are a viable strategy for morally and practically wise actions, including knowledge management projects.