I want you to get out and make it work
Science's "objective" world "is but an interpretation of the world of our immediate experience" ANGEN,p. It limits itself and restricts the possibility of gaining knowledge of what cannot yet be known because it is beyond the legitimated ways of knowing.
Its institutional control operates throughout research development and reaches not only researchers, by determining their options, but also their objects of analysis, by specifying what is "valid" to be known.
So called "knowledge" is, therefore, none other than the result of current convention in the world of science, usually associated with the ontology and epistemology characteristic of positivism. Nevertheless, the latter is just one among various possible means of knowledge production.
Are the so called qualitative research legitimacy and representation crises not related, then, to the survival of a realistic ontology in the construction of the "other" in scientific texts?
How do qualitative researchers sort out the tension between the supposed "objectivity" that so-called scientific knowledge requires and both the participant actors' and their own "subjectivity"?
Is it possible to have access to the participant's identity in qualitative research without calling for an ontological rupture?
How are researchers' ontological and epistemological assumptions related to the quality of their research? As with any other form of knowing, rather than being exclusive, it complements the Epistemology of the Knowing Subject in which I place such paradigms.
The Path of Epistemological Reflection Epistemology raises many questions including: It makes up a persistent, creative activity that is renewed time and again. Such reflections, that are present in scientists' practical activity, even though they may not be named as such, are closely linked with the elucidation of the paradigms in force in the production of every discipline.
The answers to questions arising from epistemological reflection in the context of a given science do not constitute the kind of a priori knowledge scientific research employs in the remaining sciences.
These questions result from the knowledge heritage of each discipline in relation to daily research practice. Epistemological reflection is what enables us to elucidate the different paradigms which give different answers to the questions raised by epistemology.
Such paradigms, emerging from established theoretical perspectives, have different ontological, epistemological and, consequently, methodological assumptions; so much so that evolution or reflection produced in one of them is not applicable as such to the others.
Likewise, those paradigms are, more often than not, at the basis of the interpretive models used by the speakers to describe social reality.
Accumulation, reformulation, improvement and updating of such theories is produced within each paradigm and their appearance is associated with the presence of relevant social events, such as the industrial revolution, which the two, so far, most forcefully established paradigms in these sciences, i.
The acceptance of such co-presence develops hand in hand with the need for different methods, set in those various paradigms, to grasp "the complex and multi-faceted" nature of reality rather than to guarantee findings validity MORAN-ELLIS et al.
This kind of epistemology focuses on subjects that know, spatially and temporally located in their theoretical-epistemological background and methodological tools. These subjects, supplied with those cognitive resources, approach the subjects that are being known and the situations they are in.
Those subjects may be understood by assuming, or not, that their characteristics are identifiable with those of an external, objective and objectifiable element, depending on whether the knower's perspective is close to or far away from the positivist paradigm.
So, the closer the knowing subjects' orientation to the interpretive paradigm, the shorter the distance between them and those other subjects who are being known. Nevertheless, a distance between the knower and the known, rendering the former "an impartial observer and the other to be subject to the observer's gaze" SAVAGE,p.
The Epistemological Proposal The Epistemology of the Known Subject I propose does not stem from pure speculation, but from an attempt to approach, with the theoretical-methodological contributions of the three mentioned coexisting paradigms, the study of extreme poverty in the city of Buenos Aires, with a focus on people who define their home address as "on the streets," comparing them to that group of families with precarious accommodation who run the risk of losing it and being also left homeless or "on the streets" 1.
For the Epistemology of the Known Subject, the reluctance of researchers to see the subjects participating in the knowledge process as objects is not based on the fact of having a different view of the ontological nature of social reality, but on the fact of claiming different ontological characteristics in relation to the human being's identity.
The former is common to all human beings, is the foundation of their dignity, and constitutes what makes them equal. The latter constitutes the differential aspect, distinguishing each human being from the others and making each individual unique. Thus, for instance, in a given context, a person's social, political and work identity would represent expressions of the existential component of their identity.
For example, the essential component cannot be known through the existential one, as is the case when identity characteristics end up being assimilated to those of the situation in which the person is acting.
Although knowing people cannot be isolated from knowing their situation, for the Epistemology of the Known Subject the person and the situation belong in two different orders of knowledge, and each has its codes, its assumptions, its ways of giving evidence, its legitimacy, its ontology and, therefore, its epistemology.The history curriculum covers the globe.
Most courses focus on particular regions or nations, but offerings also include courses that transcend geographical boundaries to examine subjects such as African diasporas, Islamic radicalism, or European influences on US intellectual history.
This guide concerns the systematic analysis of social inequalities. While stressing what causes social inequalities, it considers such topics as: what is a social inequality, how do social inequalities arise, why do they take different forms, why do they vary in degree across societies, what sustains social inequalities over time, how do various institutions and practices contribute to.
"The Measure of Civilization is a superb model of operationalizing the social sciences.
A wonderful achievement."--Jared Diamond, author ofGuns, Germs, and Steel "The Measure of Civilization is a terrific book--it will inform, stimulate, and challenge you.
Beautifully summarizing and quantifying the major developments in energy capture, social organization, war technology, and categorization. critical for determining how to model network dynamics.
In this work, we study the role that self-similarity For this, our work relies on two detailed, time-stamped traces of social networks, the Renren dataset [Zhao et al. ] (complete, Self-Similarity in Social Network Dynamics Three Lessons in Semiotics of Culture and Communication.
Second Lesson: The construction of social reality and multiculturalism. David Lewis (–) was one of the most important philosophers of the 20th Century. He made significant contributions to philosophy of language, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of science, decision theory, epistemology, meta-ethics and aesthetics.