Reality as Stratified
But Bhaskar argues that we can conclude more than this. Something about the basic structure of the intransitive dimension can be inferred from the analysis of the conditions of possibility of experiment.
This analysis implies three levels of reality:a. the ‘real' world of mechanisms, powers, tendencies and so on, which science seeks to discover;
b. the ‘actual' level of flows, or sequences of events, which may be produced under experimental conditions, or occur in more complex and less predictable ‘conjunctures' outside the laboratory;
c. the ‘empirical' level of observed events, which must necessarily be only a small subset of b.
A strict empiricism can recognize only level-c phenomena as real. A more relaxed empiricism may recognize the existence of unexperienced, but still experienceable, events (level b) as real. Bhaskar calls such a position ‘actualism'. But the distinctive feature of transcendental - ‘critical' - realism is its claim to demonstrate the independent reality of the third, ‘real' level of mechanisms, their powers and tendencies (level a). This third level can be inferred from the intelligibility of experimental practice as such, and it is also, of course, what makes experiments necessary. Were there nothing but the flow of experienceable events, there would be nothing for experiments to discover, and knowledge would be merely a matter of observing and summarizing. Remember, however, that the analysis of experimentation shows only that there must be underlying causal mechanisms and powers. It does not tell us anything about what they are. That is a matter for substantive research in each scientific discipline.
So, the claim made by critical realism is that there is a reality independent of our scientific investigation of it, but also that this reality is stratified, or layered. The key levels identified in Bhaskars philosophical ontology are, as we saw, the real, the actual and the empirical. Of course, Bhaskar accepts that each of these levels is real, so there is some terminological confusion, with the word ‘real’ also being used to denote one level of reality. The metaphor of levels implies that critical realism is a form of ‘depth’ realism, such that scientific investigation attempts to penetrate behind or below the surface appearances of things to uncover their generative causes.