Interpretive Theory

Interpretive theory poses a set of answers to the question, How do we know what we know about the social world? Interpretivists go beyond viewing interpretation as one among several approaches or types of methods by which human scientists (also known as social scientists) can acquire knowledge. They argue that the objects that human scientists study are themselves interpretations. Hence, all knowledge of human actions and practices requires us to grasp the meanings they embody. Equally, interpretive theorists differ in their analyses of what meanings are, how they are communicated, and how they relate to actions. Intentionalist positions construe meanings as individual beliefs, desires, or intentions, whereas more structuralist variants link meanings to discourses or systems of signs. Interpretive theories also differ about how meanings operate within society, for instance, through logical progression, structural links between concepts, or individual dispositions. A focus on meanings has led some interpretivists to view the task of the human sciences as primarily appreciative rather than explanatory; they argue that the human sciences aim solely at a deeper understanding of the rich texture of the cultural objects they study. Other interpretivists insist, [Page 491]however, that greater understanding is an integral part of giving explanation in the human sciences; they argue that we can explain actions and practices only by interpreting the beliefs or meanings that inform them.

Intentionalist strands of interpretive theory, in particular, offer a way of explaining practices of governance. They provide a distinct account of the ways in which governing takes place in and through a differentiated array of networks across boundaries of state and civil society. Intentionalists begin from the premise that people can engage in a practice only because they hold certain beliefs or concepts, which imbue their actions with meanings. Thus, human scientists can account for people's actions by invoking their beliefs about their interests, the norms that affect them and their theories about the world. In the same way, researchers can analyze the rise and content of governance by elucidating the relevant meanings and contexts in which they arose. Analysts can explain practices of governance by exploring the relevant beliefs and concepts of the people involved, be they politicians, officials, or citizens. Interpretive theory suggests that we understand networks, for example, as enacted by individuals through narratives that are constantly interpreted and made afresh through the interactions of individuals. This contrasts with positivist approaches that view networks as objectified structures or as adhering to a fixed form. Interpretive theory advances the understanding of network dimensions and characteristics, and the ways in which networks change in the beliefs, concepts, and theories of those involved. Interpretive theory encourages us to examine the ways in which our social life, institutions, and policies are created, sustained, and modified by people.