In this essay, the theoretical concepts of critical junctures, the related concept of path dependency, and styles of reasoning will be discussed in relation to each other. While styles of reasoning compare most directly with path dependency, there is still interesting insights to be gained from comparing styles of reasoning and critical junctures.
Hacking’s ‘style of reasoning’ is a framework to understand the emergence and importance of various scientific concepts, truths, and ways of fining and gathering evidence to support these claims. According to Hacking, styles of reasoning are not just toolboxes of techniques for researches to pick up and apply to various phenomena, but they instead create …show more content…
I contend that just like any path dependant process, styles of reasoning emerge from critical junctures. Critical juncture theory also provides some useful analysis on the role of change and near misses. It is not necessary that new styles of reasoning emerge out of critical junctures, and institutions resist change. Styles are shaped by the institutions in society, directing actors to accept or resist new styles of reasoning. Just like the Catholic Church resisted new styles of reasoning that threatened the sanctioned styles that matched the Church’s own epistemology. Despite my belief that styles of reasoning emerge from critical junctures, Hacking might contend that this is not the case. In their definition of critical junctures, Capoccia and Kelemen stress the relatively short period of time in which critical junctures must occur. When Hacking outlines Nietzsche’s view of ontology, however, seems to imply that the opposite is more in keeping with styles of