IACR 2026: Varieties of Realism, Varieties of Critical Realism?

Thursday July 30th: 9.15 - 10.45

Despite A Realist Theory of Science having received circa 17,000 citations, its ideas have been relatively neglected by contemporary metaphysicians and philosophers of science working on powers. Part of the reason for this may be the language Bhaskar uses, which has not been taken up. Here, translations will be offered of some of Bhaskar's key terms such as generative mechanism, transfactuality and tendencies, showing that they name ideas contemporary powers theorists ought to accept. However, Bhaskar's notion of tendency is one that falls short of a fully committed realism and a diagnosis is offered of how and why this happens. A deeper realism is advanced and a fully-blown tendential view of reality is recommended.

Thursday July 30th: 14.00 - 15.30

Climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of hazards like flooding and wildfire around the world. People are not affected equally or uniformly by these hazards. Therefore, research on the social impacts of climate change assesses the “vulnerability” of specific groups, communities, or regions to future hazards. Many existing studies are guided by either 1) (post)positivist approaches that use deductively derived indicators to measure or even predict climate vulnerability; or, 2) inductive, interpretivist approaches designed to understand people’s perceptions and experiences. Both approaches provide valuable insight into climate impacts—at the empirical level of reality. This presentation will demonstrate the value of depth ontology to enhance our understanding of climate impacts. Based on qualitative research with rural and Indigenous communities in the Canadian Prairies, I demonstrate how applied critical realist research can help us expose and critique the real structures and mechanisms that cause climate impacts, but are not readily apparent through dominant positivist-deductive or interpretivist approaches. I consider the structure/agency interplay in communities’ experiences of flooding by drawing on critical realist conceptualizations of structure and agency articulated by Roy Bhaskar and Margaret Archer. I conclude that climate “vulnerability” is not, itself, real. Emancipatory research must target more pervasive structures and mechanisms to transform climate injustice.

Friday July 31st: 14.00 - 15.30

It is nearly twenty-five years since publication of Critical Realism and Marxism (Brown, Fleetwood and Roberts, 2002 London: Routledge). Over that time critical realism has continued to develop across many levels, inclusive of the levels of philosophy and political economy. My presentation attempts to take a step back and survey the development of critical realism over the period. From this perspective, I aim to advance two insights: one narrow insight, regarding the influence of Spinoza on the development of critical realism, and one broader insight, about disciplinary boundaries. Regarding Spinoza, in Critical Realism and Marxism I pointed to E.V Ilyenkov’s description of a line of development from Spinoza to contemporary political economy. Over the past 10 years or so, Knio and colleagues have emphasised a different line of development from Spinoza and critical realism to contemporary political economy, for example in ‘Morphogenetic Regulation.’ My narrower aim is simply to compare and thereby help clarify these two lines of development from Spinoza to contemporary political economy. My broader insight concerns the inadequacy of disciplinary boundaries: I suggest that even the rudimentary survey across disciplines that I offer is more helpful for orientating and coordinating research than is the perspective of any one disciplinary ‘silo.’ I conclude by stressing that both the narrower and broader aims of my presentation are directed towards an overarching mission: to challenge the prevailing economic orthodoxy that is complicit in the multi-faceted crises of our current conjuncture. Such a challenge to economic orthodoxy can be undertaken by uniting disciplines and perspectives under the banner of what may be termed ‘critical political economy.’ Critical realism and Spinoza’s anti-reductionism are important allies in this mission.