News – Page 7 – iNtgrty

News

ARTICLE 60: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree studies. Post-modernism

6th Oct 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

How would you define knowledge?

Is knowledge “a final verdict by an expert or authoritarian figure”?

Is knowledge dependent on time?

Does context influence knowledge?

Can the meaning of knowledge be changed and still remain valid?

Post-modernism offers interesting, liberating and unexpected answers to these and other questions about the nature of knowledge.

I discuss post-modernism in this article.

Post-modernism gradually became popular from the 1950s onwards. Instead of relying on one approach to knowing, post-modernists support a pluralistic epistemology which utilises multiple ways of knowing. Post-modernism is more than just a philosophical movement or school of thought based on a definite point of view, value system or goal. It is applied mainly in the artistic and social sciences, although it has also gained acceptance in other fields of learning, for example economics, architecture, etc. Different from modernism, which is technicist in nature, post-modernism is critical but also interpretive.

Post-modernism regards knowledge as fundamentally fragmented and unstable. It rejects the possibility that we can have objective knowledge. Any research should question the validity and accuracy of current knowledge, and the paradigms that are used with research methods should be articulated to the way this is achieved.

Post-modernism questions the existing knowledge upon which we base our thinking and deconstructs this to convey a different way of interpretation and reality. Narratives of truth and knowledge, text or written content, previous authority sources of power, for example the church and government are deconstructed. Language is fluid and arbitrary and rooted in power or knowledge relations. Meaning is, therefore, vague and the result of deconstruction without scientific proof. Following on from this reasoning, post-modernists caution that we should be careful with generalisations, seeing that events and phenomena are mostly only true in a particular context or point in time or both.

Post-modernism values the subjective and multiple opinions of individuals and communities rather than predetermined rules for action. It assigns value to multiple meanings rather than the single, authoritative voice of the expert researcher. This is because what we call knowledge must be made with the linguistic and other meaning-making resources of a particular culture, and different cultures can see the world in different ways.

All knowledge of reality bears the mark of human culture, personality and biology, and these cannot be separated from what a specific group of people or culture would call knowledge or truth. Post-modernism argues that what we call knowledge is a special kind of story that puts together words and images in ways that portray the perspective of a particular culture or some relatively powerful members of that culture.

According to post-modernists universal, objective truth does not exist. All judgements of truth exist within a cultural context. This is sometimes also called “cultural relativism”. Stated differently, our endeavour is not to find absolute truth or facts, but the best approximation of truth as it applies to a specific group in a specific situation and a specific time. This does not mean that just anything can be accepted as truth.

Post-modernists reject the idea of a fixed, universal and eternal foundation for reality. They argue that because reality is in part culturally dependent and culture changes over time and varies from community to community, we can logically assume that reality is not the same for everybody. In addition, it is asserted that we construct reality in accordance with our needs, interests, prejudices and cultural traditions.

Because power is distrusted, post-modernists try to set up a less hierarchical approach in which authority sources are more diffuse. The knowledge that we construct refers more to probability than to certainty. It is constantly changing as each individual or group gives a particular interpretation to it, reflecting distinctive needs and experiences. For this reason, we must deconstruct previous authority sources of power and text to uncover the hidden or intended meanings and discourse.

Facts are seen as temporary and volatile, with the result that they should not be regarded as an only truth. Reality is in part socially constructed with the result that reality is the product of subjective human interpretation with no sharp fact-value distinction. All factual statements reflect the values they serve, and all value beliefs are conditioned by factual assumptions. What we call facts are only somewhat less value-determined, but they are not independent of values.

The idea of a socially constructed reality leads directly to a radical shift in the idea of method. Some post-modernists hold that a research method not only discovers a part of reality, it simultaneously constructs it. No longer do we see ourselves as seeking to uncover a pre-existing reality, but rather as involved in an interactive process of knowledge creation. As researchers we are part of developing an explanation and understanding of reality and life. What we arrive at is in part autobiographical: it reflects our personal life-story and our interpretation of the meaning of life.

In terms of research, convention is challenged, research approaches are mixed, ambiguity is tolerated, diversity is emphasised, innovation and change are embraced, and multiple realities are focused on. It is a broad term that encompasses many different research methods, most of them valuing uncertainty, disorder, indeterminacy and regression rather than progress.

Post-modernism rejects the emphasis on rational discovery through the scientific method. It replaces rational discovery through scientific research with respect for difference and a celebration of the local at the expense of the universal.

Post-modernism is often associated with post-structuralism. It can include elements of pre-modernism and modernism along with many other ways of knowing, for example intuition, relational and spiritual. Generally, post-modernism accepts the basic ontological assumption of relativism and claims that there can be no “objective” or final truth as all “truth” is a socially constructed entity. Although post-modernism accepts some elements of modernism, the issue of objective truth is not shared by them.

Reason and science are seen by some as simply myths created by people. It, therefore, rejects the notion that science can be viewed as objective. It consists of a loose alliance of intellectual perspectives which collectively pose a challenging critique of the fundamental premise on which modernism, specifically the scientific research method, is based. Therefore, the notion that science, or scientism, is the paradigm of all true knowledge is rejected.

Technicist researchers, favouring paradigms such as scientism and positivism, claim that post-modernism questions existing knowledge on account of opinions, perceptions and presuppositions that are not corroborated by substantial and authoritative evidence. This, they feel, renders research, making use of the post-modernist paradigm, unscientific. Post-modernism, they feel, is based on an anti-realist, subjective ontology, because the formulation of facts is based on human interpretation.

Even proponents of post-modernism do not always agree on what scientific research really means. There are progressive and conservative post-modernists. Some post-modernists seek reaction while others seek resistance. Then there are those who strive for reform and others who like to disrupt the status quo. All post-modernists do not agree to the claim that reality is a human construct.

Not all researchers support the idea of post-modernism. According to the opponents of post-modernism the approach is too tentative, inconclusive frivolous and rigid. Some academics feel that post-modernism adds nothing to analytical or empirical knowledge because it is not based on any principles and supports no consistent and new theories. While some regard post-modernism as not sufficiently objective, there are also those who feel that it is not sufficiently flexible.

The ability of post-modernism to generate truth is questioned because, like any research, findings need to be reported. Post-modernists are of the opinion that the use of language (to write research reports) damages the accuracy of what is shared because language cannot relate reality accurately.

Summary

Post-modernism is based on a pluralistic epistemology.

This means that multiple ways of knowing are applied.

Power is distrusted.

Knowledge is fragmented and unstable.

It refers more to probability than certainty.

Reality is not the same for everybody.

Research focuses on multiple realities.

Facts and values interact.

Universal, objective truth does not exist.

Convention is challenged through research.

Any research approach and a variety of research methods can be followed.

Rational discovery through science is rejected.

An interactive process of knowledge creation is used.

Ambiguity is tolerated.

Diversity is emphasised.

Innovation and change are embraced.

Multiple opinions and meanings are valued.

Post-modernism is associated with post-structuralism, post-colonialism, post-positivism, relativism, pre-modernism and modernism.

Post-modernism is opposed to positivism, pre-modernism and modernism.

Criticism against post-modernism is that it is resisted by some academics, who regard it as too tentative, inconclusive, frivolous and rigid. Academics also disagree about the meaning of the concept.

News

ARTICLE 59: Research Methodology for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Post-colonialism

5th Oct 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Was colonialism a success?

Who benefited from colonialism?

Who were damaged by the empire building process?

What would the empires and colonies of old have looked like if the transitive process did not take place?

Does it still matter or is it water under the bridge?

Questions like these show that there is lots of potential for interesting social research in the colonial past.

I discuss post-colonialism in the article.

Post-colonialism is the study of the impact of colonial rule on colonised people and how it impacted on their culture, economy, religion, government, etc. The key to post-colonialism, as to colonialism, can be found in the presence of any form of oppression. It is often a reaction to what especially the victims of colonial rule would regard as a variety of different injustices.

Post-colonialism is mostly based on a description of the colonial past, often by writers from the colonies; a tradition of gaining insight and knowledge by learning from the past. Ironically, it was academics from colonial powers that mostly studied and wrote about the social and political power relationships between the colonial powers and their colonies. This, however, gradually changed as colonies regained their freedom and started delivering their own academics, writers and researchers.

Post-colonialism is a set of approaches to the interpretation and understanding of colonialism that draws both continuities with, and challenges, the grand narratives of colonial rule.

Political power, cultural identity and culture are often the focus of post-colonial studies. The purpose of such studies is often the redress of injustices of the past and regaining cultural, intellectual, political, national and judicial independence and autonomous status.

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods can be used to do research in post-colonialism.

Feminism, critical race theory, ethnomethodology and post-modernism are closely associated with post-colonialism in the sense that all these paradigms can be used to investigate oppression.

In a feministic vein post-colonialism is seen as an effort to subjugate women. In a critical race-theory vein, an attitude of superiority towards people of a different culture, gender, language, or colour are often indications of post-colonialism that can, and often should be researched with the aim of achieving equity and growth.

In an ethnomethodological vein post-colonialism focuses on common-sense reality as it plays out in interaction between people, i.e. social life.

In a post-modernistic vein, it is believed that independence and freedom are Western ideologies used to colonise foreign cultures.

Post-colonialism is a good example of a paradigm that exposes a rather unsettling disagreement amongst academics about the true meanings of paradigms. This can be found in discussions and arguments about paradigms in books, to some extent, and magazine articles, to a much larger extent. Different writers discuss paradigms from different perspectives and in different contexts, making it difficult to generalise about which paradigms are in opposition to which others and in terms of what criteria they differ. The disruptive nature of post-colonialism is yet another characteristic that it shares with post-modernism.

Post-colonialism, for example, differs from colonialism in the sense that it focuses more on the results of colonialism rather than the nature of colonialism as a philosophical point of view. It, furthermore, can be said to be in opposition to any of the technicist paradigms in the sense that it focuses more on the study of subjective interpretation of social interaction, whereas technicist paradigms, such as positivism, focus more on statistical analysis and cause and effect. Both, however, explore social reality. That is why claims to opposition or association between paradigms should be qualified, or at least understood as being true in a specific context and in terms of specific criteria. This means that the same paradigm can be associated with and opposed to a second paradigm. Even this, however, is not perfectly accurate because every opposition or association should be qualified.

Some writers focus on the disappointing results of colonialisation, for example inequalities, cultural conflicts, fragmentation and refugee problems, while others emphasise the benefits of colonialism, for example educational systems, infrastructure and technology as elements of post-colonialism. These, however, are often sensitive issues that lead to conflict and heated arguments.

Because of its historical nature (colonies belong in the past) research in post-colonialism leans heavily on written documents. Written documents invariably require a measure of deconstruction, which should not be a problem seeing that it is typical of virtually all qualitative research.

Some academics feel that most literature on colonialism is written by countries that were colonial powers. This, however, is rapidly changing as academics in colonies of the past increasingly write about topics such as colonialism, racism, discrimination, equity and justice.

Post-colonialism is also criticised for its obsession with national identity. Some researchers feel that national identity is a rather fluid concept that changes over time and, therefore, does not justify any claims to what could have been, or what could not have been, if a particular country was not colonised.

Summary

Post-colonialism mostly deals with oppression, learning from and describing the colonial past.

The research process focuses on interpretation and understanding.

Post-colonialism draws continuities with and challenges the grand narratives of colonial rule.

A quantitative or qualitative research approach can be followed.

However, a qualitative approach is preferred.

Post-colonialism can be associated with ethnomethodology, post-modernism, critical race theory and feminism.

It is opposed to positivism and structuralism.

Criticism against post-colonialism includes:

That it is too dependent on literature study.
It is mostly written by die “wrongdoers”.
It is often obsessed with national identity.
And that colonization was a failure.

News

ARTICLE 58: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Positivism

3rd Oct 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Have you ever heard of a paradigm that supports natural science, but:

Is not interested in meeting the target group for their research.
Is not interested in discovering the ultimate truth.
Accepts supernatural and abstract data for their research. AND
Seeks the simplest solution to the research problem.

I discuss positivism in this video.

According to the positivist paradigm true knowledge is based on experience of the senses and can be obtained by observation, and by conducting experiments, control, measurement, to achieve reliability and validity. Positivism, therefore, strives for objectivity, measurability, predictability, controllability, patterning, the construction of laws and rules of behaviour, and the ascription of causality.

The positivist paradigm of exploring social reality is based on the idea that you can best gain an understanding of human behaviour through observation and reason. Stated differently, only objective, observable facts can be the basis for science.

A positivist approach to knowledge is based on a real and objective interpretation of the data at our disposal. Such knowledge can be transmitted in tangible form – knowledge is often derived from observation.

Positivism is a philosophy of knowing (epistemology) which believes that only knowledge gained through direct observation is factual and trustworthy. Factual information collection, for example watching people work, measuring manufactured items, measuring time in athletics, is regarded as objective and therefore also valid.

Observations should be quantifiable so that statistical analysis can be done. Researchers following a positivist approach believe that there is one objective reality that is observable by a researcher who has little, if any, impact on the object being observed.

Positivism implies that there is objective, independent laws of nature to which human life is subjected. It is the purpose of the research to discover and describe these objective laws. This view describes society as being made up of structures, concepts, labels and relationships. Proving the existence and impact of such laws requires discovery through scientific means.

The researcher observes the community from the outside (an ‘etic’ approach). This means that you are seen as being independent from the study and following a deductive approach. As the researcher, you should concentrate on facts rather than human interests, making this approach a deductive one.

To explain the concept of doing research independently of other people, notably your target group for the research – a researcher following a positivist approach can receive and analyse completed questionnaires from people whom he or she has never met and does not intend meeting either. All they are interested in are the responses from which objective conclusions can be made.

With these assumptions of science, the ultimate goal is to integrate and systematise findings into a meaningful pattern or theory which is regarded as tentative and not the ultimate truth. Theory is subject to revision or modification as new evidence is found.

The positivist paradigm is mostly used with quantitative research. A systems approach is followed to generate knowledge, and quantification is essential to enhance precision in the description of parameters and the discernment of the relationships among them.

An interesting feature of positivism is that it accepts the supernatural and abstract as data for research purposes. However, theological (the supernatural) or metaphysical (the abstract) claims must yield to the positive – that which can be explained in terms of scientific laws.

Positivists believe that knowledge can be “revealed” or “discovered” through the use of the scientific method. The “discovered” knowledge enables us to provide possible explanations of the causes of things that happen in the world.

Positivists argue that the scientific research method produces precise, verifiable, systematic and theoretical answers to the research question or hypothesis. They also suggest that the use of the scientific method provides answers that are neutral and technical and can thus be universalised and generalised to all historical and cultural contexts.

The advantage of a positivist approach to research is that you can cover a wide range of situations in a short period of time. However, the following disadvantages of positivism should also be borne in mind:

• Positivism relies on experience as a valid source of knowledge. However, a wide range of basic and important concepts such as cause, time and space are not based on experience.

• Positivism assumes that all types of processes can be perceived as a certain variation of actions of individuals or relationships between individuals. We know that this is not always the case.

• Adoption of positivism can be criticised for reliance on the status quo. In other words, research findings are only descriptive, thus they lack insight into in-depth issues.

Positivist thinkers lean strongly on determinism, empiricism, parsimony and generality. ‘Determinism’ means that events are caused by other circumstances; and hence, understanding such causal links is necessary for prediction and control. ‘Empiricism’ means the collection of verifiable empirical evidence in support of theories or hypotheses and knowledge stems from human experience. We discussed empiricism as a paradigm already. Knowledge stems from human experience. The approach is deductive in nature because you are seen as being independent from the study while concentrating on facts rather than human interests. Parsimony means that phenomena are explained in the most efficient way possible. Generality is the process of generalising the observation of the particular phenomenon to the world at large.

Although some researchers feel that positivism is also associated with rationalism, others disagree, claiming that the two actually challenge one another. Constructivism and Post-positivism reject positivism.

Not all natural scientists and certainly not many social scientists support the positivist paradigm. Furthermore, natural scientists do not always reveal their research practices accurately in their research reports. Thirdly, the term “positivist” is not always interpreted as meaning a quantitative approach to research.

Summary

Positivism relies on the senses for data collection.

Reliability and validity of data are regarded as important requirements.

Research follows a process of observation, experimentation, control and measurement.

An etic and deductive approach is followed in research.

Facts are researched.

Supernatural and abstract data are also accepted.

There is only one objective reality that can be identified by means of observation and reason.

Knowledge can be revealed or discovered.

Society consists of structures, concept, labels and relationships.

Findings are integrated and systematised into a meaningful pattern or theory.

A quantitative research approach is preferred.

Findings are neutral and technical and, therefore, also often generalisable.

Positivism can be associated with empiricism, scientism, behaviourism and modernism.

Positivism is opposed to constructivism.

Some characteristics of positivism can be associated with while others are in opposition to post-positivism and rationalism.

Criticism against positivism is:

That reports are not always accurate.
That the wrong approach is sometimes followed.
Not all academics support positivism for research purposes.

News

ARTICLE 57: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Phenomenology

3rd Oct 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. J.P. Nel

Do you think personal perceptions can be a true reflection of the nature of events or phenomena?

Can opinions based on nothing more than experience be accepted as valid and accurate data for research?

Can you come to logical findings if you do not use cognitive thinking and reflection when conducting research?

Here we have a paradigm that does all of those things.

I discuss phenomenology in this video.

Phenomenology is a philosophy that believes that individual behaviour is the product of a person’s experience through direct interaction with phenomena. An objective external reality is believed not to have any effect on behaviour.

Social reality is believed to have meaning; therefore it should be taken into consideration when developing knowledge. Social reality is important for the way in which people behave as well as the factors that determine behaviour. This implies that research falls back on the common-sense thinking of individuals. Actual experience is the essence of data used in phenomenology. Opinions, point of view, beliefs, superstitions, etc. are not taken into consideration.

Phenomenology deals with how people make sense of the world around them and how this can be used to understand phenomena and human behaviour. Phenomenologists realise that they should take their own perceptions into consideration when investigating those of other people. Their perceptions, however, should be based on experiences.

The data, research approaches and methods used in the natural sciences differ markedly from the data, research approaches and methods used in the social sciences, notably phenomenology. Data is analysed by reflecting on how we experienced events and phenomena, and gathering meaning from our reflections and consciousness.

Research falls back on the common-sense thinking of individuals because of the importance of social reality. The objective of phenomenology is to investigate and describe an event or phenomenon as consciously experienced, without theories about their causal explanations or objective reality. The description needs to describe as accurately as possible the phenomenon, without judging, in order to remain true to the facts. Phenomenological research, thus, studies people’s perceptions, perspectives and understanding of a particular situation, event or phenomenon to construct meaning.

Human beings interpret interaction with phenomena and attach meanings to different actions and/or ideas to construct new experiences. You, as the researcher, need to develop empathic understanding of phenomena to know how individuals interpret what they observe or experience, to understand the feelings, motives and thoughts that determine the behaviour of others.

Research based on a phenomenological paradigm strongly focuses on capturing the uniqueness of events or phenomena. For example, as part of research in human behaviour you may immerse yourself in the lives of convicted criminals. In carrying out such an inquiry, you might observe convicts in a correctional facility, share their particular struggles, conflicts and fears in an attempt to derive a deeper understanding of what it is like for them to serve time in the facility.

Phenomenological studies attend not only to the events being studied but also their political, historical, and sociocultural contexts. The studies strive to be as faithful as possible to the actual experiences, especially as it might be described in the participants’ own words. In the example of research in a correctional facility, you would, for example, ask convicts to describe situations where they felt that their lives were threatened.

In such inquiries, phenomenological studies resist the use of concepts, categories, taxonomies, or reflections about the experiences. This implies that generalisations should be avoided because they may distort the desired focus on the uniqueness of the events. You would also avoid any research methods having a tendency to construct a predetermined set of fixed procedures and techniques that would govern the research project.

An alternative to seeking assertions of enduring value or considering all human experiences as unique, can be to aim for a limited form of generalisability. Such a limited form recognises the uniqueness of local situations but accepts that, depending on the degree of similarity of the sending and receiving contexts, some transferability of findings is possible.

Phenomenological research embraces participants as stakeholders and participants in the research process. Even if limited, you and the participants can make some generalisations of what a phenomenon is like as an experience from the ‘insider’s’ perspective by analysing multiple perspectives of the same situation. This is yet another example of ‘emic’, the insider’s point of view, as opposed to ‘etic’ which would be the outsider’s point of view.

Phenomenologists are reluctant to follow a structured step-by-step research procedure. They argue that this would erode the integrity of the observed phenomenon. Research guidelines might be necessary just as long as it does not become a rigid procedure.

Almost any qualitative research method can be used, including interviews, questionnaires, focus groups, etc. The only precondition is that the data should be a full description of actual experiences.

The data collection method used will largely decide how the data will be analysed. Keep in mind that data can be gathered as and when an event takes place, which would mean that the data can change in unexpected ways and directions. You should focus on deep understanding of the data through analysis. The data and its analysis should contribute to the achievement of the purpose of your research. Reflection is needed to extract meaning from data, and you will need to carefully analyse the data to achieve this.

Phenomenological studies emphasise hermeneutic or interpretive analysis of actual experiences. It is also associated with symbolic interactionism, which argues that the individual is continually interpreting and analysing the symbolic meaning of his or her environment, with symbolism often being the spoken or written word. Phenomenology tries to interpret and describe experiences in a way that others will also be able to understand.

Phenomenology is opposed to the positivist paradigm and most other technicist paradigms. The reason for this is that phenomenology requires collecting and reflecting on actual experiences which will seldom include quantitative analysis. Data gathered phenomenologically would mostly be subjective whereas the positivist paradigm requires objective data.

Researchers criticise phenomenology for many different reasons. The paradigm is interpreted and used in a variety of ways by different researchers, with the result that the meaning of the philosophy has been eroded. Secondly, there is little, if any consistency in the examples given in many different fields of research, all claiming to be case studies of phenomenology. Thirdly, phenomenological observations are not always useful for research purposes because of the lack of cognitive thinking and reflection. Fourthly, the limited provision for the development of generalizable knowledge is contrary to the purpose of especially doctoral studies.

Summary

Phenomenology studies experience through direct interaction.

Social reality rather than the external reality is investigated.

The researcher’s and target group’s perceptions are used to understand phenomena and human behaviour.

Research attends to political, historical and socio-cultural contexts.

The uniqueness of events and phenomena can be the focus of the research.

The researcher can analyse data by falling back on common sense thinking.

Accurate descriptions of events and phenomena are related.

Events and phenomena are not judged.

Conscious experiences are described without theory and causal explanations.

The use of concepts, categories, procedures, reflections, taxonomies and techniques are resisted.

Phenomenology is associated with ethnomethodology, symbolic interactionism, hermeneutics and interpretivism.

The paradigm is opposed to scientism, positivism and modernism.

Criticism against the paradigm are:

That cognitive thinking and reflection are neglected
It is difficult to find valid examples of the use of phenomenology.
It is seldom possible to generalise research findings.
Researchers are confused about the meaning of the paradigm.

News

ARTICLE 56: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Neoliberalism

1st Oct 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Many writers wrote about an innocent and beautiful farm girl who sought fame and fortune in the city.

Only to become the victim of unscrupulous criminals who misused her innocence.

Neoliberalism is such a teenage girl.

In this article, I will tell you how vulnerable neoliberalism is to the corrupt people of our world.

Neoliberalism is a description of the dominant mode of conducting political and economic organisation in a global world, which obviously would also be the field in which research is conducted. It also has an impact on other elements of the human environment, for example education, jurisdiction, and science.

Whereas classical liberalism signalled a negative view of the state, neoliberalism conceives of a positive role for a state that creates the optimal conditions for capitalist expansion, control and exploitation. The state has a definite function and responsibility towards the community, including the protection of private property rights, guaranteeing the quality and integrity of money, military defence and police protection of the community, the proper functioning of the economy and markets, and the protection of the environment. Governments that support neoliberalism would typically follow policies that encourage privatisation, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade and the reduction in government spending in order to enhance the role of the private sector in the economy. A neoliberalist economic approach would promote entrepreneurship, creativity, participative leadership and democracy.

Neoliberalism is associated with a form of state that seeks reduction in public spending; it is obsessed with efficiency and effectiveness and elevates the market as the primary instrument for determining the distribution of social goods. An important basis of liberal thought is that all individuals are equal in terms of being legal citizens of a country.

In terms of the academic focus, knowledge is regarded and promoted as an investment for the future and as a global commodity. Traditional, legacy approaches to education and training are challenged by focusing more on the skills needs of industry, rather than philosophy and theory.

In neoliberalist research, the relationships between researchers and communities have changed from “research on” to “research with” communities. This means that research based on a neoliberalist paradigm would include the researcher as part of the community while conducting research in liberalisation, i.e. an emic approach.

Action research became more prominent than in the past because of the emic approach and the focus on politics and the economy. In this respect the purpose of the research is not just to contribute to the available knowledge in a field, or to develop emancipatory theory, but rather to forge a more direct link between thought and action that underlies the pure-applied distinction that has traditionally characterised management and social research.

Private institutions are important role players in the preparation of students for future careers. Research, consequently, focuses more on the needs of industry, governments and markets rather than on knowledge for the sake of academic status. Action research is conducted with the primary intention of solving a specific immediate and concrete problem in a local setting.

Even though neoliberalism clashes with liberalism in some respects, it also supports liberal values such as equality and freedom in relation to imperialism, gender, race and austerity. Neoliberalism is associated with critical theory, post-colonialism, feminism, radicalism, romanticism, and critical race theory with the result that researchers making use of a neoliberalist paradigm would probably make use of a qualitative research approach.

The technicist paradigms, notably scientism, positivism and modernism can be said to be in opposition to neoliberalism. Some academics claim that the lack of scientific consistency should be blamed for the failure of neoliberalist government and economic policies, while others feel that it is rather unethical and irresponsible government and business practices that resulted in increased unemployment, higher inflation, social unrest, environmental disasters, etc. in many countries.

Summary

Neoliberalism focuses on political and other elements of the human environment.

Knowledge and skills development are regarded as an investment.

The state and private institutions play an important role in the economy and therefore also in research.

Neoliberalism support extensive economic liberalisation.

A qualitative research approach is preferred.

An emic approach towards the target for the research is favoured.

Neoliberalism is well suited for action research.

Neoliberalism can be associated with critical theory, critical race theory, feminism, radicalism, romanticism and post-colonialism.

Neoliberalism is opposed to scientism, positivism and modernism.

Criticism against neoliberalism is that it lacks scientific consistency and that unethical and irresponsible government and business practices can damage the value of the paradigm for research and practice.

News

ARTICLE 55: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Modernism

29th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Here we have a paradigm with an identity crisis.

It is called modernism, but it is bureaucratic.

It supports scientific research methods but tries to predict the future.

It tries to predict the future but ignores environmental change.

It is based on a realist ontology but is optimistic about the future.

It focuses on research about social events and phenomena but rejects interpretivist paradigms.

I will try to explain how these anomalies in modernism are possible.

Modernism evolved over a period of approximately 400 years from a philosophy based on the interpretation of the mythical to a paradigm based on logic.

It is a movement towards articulating traditional beliefs and practices with modern ideas and needs.

Initially modernism was associated with the church and art. However, the concept developed into a full-fledged paradigm through a process of logical growth. Currently science and reason are critical considerations for achieving accuracy, objectivity, and reliability in the process of knowledge creation. Reason transcends and exists independently of our existential, historical and cultural environments.

Some researchers regard modernism as the paradigm of all true knowledge.

Modernism favours structure, hierarchy, order and centralised control. Planning leads to order, authority is vested in a superior, centralised control is an effective management approach and planning should be done vertically from top to bottom. Consequently, modernist management is largely bureaucratic, prescriptive, procedural and structured.

In terms of research, modernism would imply investigating stages of development. Modernism belongs to the group of technicist paradigms, which favour quantitative research approaches. Important values, therefore, include the scientific method; the authority of the expert; the singularity of meaning; truth and objectivity.

Modernism is used for prediction by analysing reasoning about information that is independent of the environment. The modernist view of time is linear, with events happening one after the other, with no other purpose than to keep progressing in a particular direction. Consequently, statistical analysis and graphical representation of trends are regarded as valuable tools for analysing data.

Modernism follows a realist ontology by accepting facts independent of the human mind. To achieve this the information that is collected and analysed needs to be objective, accurate, valid and authentic in terms of academic meaning, value, and content. Knowledge increases over time and supports certainty, order, organisation, prediction, rationality, linearity and progress. Even though a realist ontology, modernism is mostly optimistic about the future.

Research making use of modernism always has as an objective proving facts by making use of accurate statistics, homogeneous epistemological and moral principles and unyielding norms.

Elements

Existing theory is considered in the search for truth and coming to valid conclusions based on the available information about a phenomenon or event. Acquired knowledge is regarded as universal and true. Reason is used to overcome conflict and challenges.

Modernism mostly relates to research on human beings.

Therefore, social research methods are often used even if in combination with a quantitative research approach. Modernism can also be associated with modern societies and developed states (as opposed to pre-modern societies). It often includes campaigns to promote human emancipation, equality, redress and social progress. The family is seen as the central unit of social order and is therefore also often the focus of research using a modernistic philosophy.

During the past approximately seventy years a series of epistemological developments followed from modernism, starting with empiricism, which claims that all knowledge is derived from sense experience. Empiricism further evolved into scientific empiricism or modern science with the development of modernist methodology.

Feminism, like most other paradigms, can be approached in a modernistic manner. It is believed that women who are oppressed by patriarchy can achieve independence and regain their “authentic selves” through reason.

Ethnography, critical theory and critical race theory can also be associated with modernism if quantitative research methods are used or a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods.

In modernistic terms language is transparent, meaning that a one-to-one relationship exists between what is written or said, and the concept that is investigated. This is in opposition with the post-modern ontology that meaning in language cannot transport meaning from one person to another without being interpreted first.

Modernism is also in opposition with the interpretivist paradigms. As you probably know by now, they are constructivism, relativism, ethnomethodology, hermeneutics, symbolic interactionism, interpretivism and phenomenology.

Interpretivist paradigms are regarded as anti-realist, meaning that they use subjective data and research methods.

A belief of modernism that clashes with critical race theory and colonialism is that all cultures will embrace the truth because it is universal. Mass culture, mass consumption and mass marketing form part of the modernistic system. Homogeneity is regarded as a strength.

Summary

Modernism is the paradigm of all true knowledge.

It is based on logic.

Master-narratives and meta-narratives are accepted for research purposes.

Modernism favours structure, hierarchy, order and centralised control.

Modernism fits in well with a quantitative research approach.

Authority is vested in a superior, who would also be an expert in the field of study.

Scientific research methods, including statistical analysis, are preferred.

Knowledge, truth, reason, validity and objectivity are important criteria for research.

Efforts are made to predict future trends by analysing data independent of the environment.

Modernism can be used in combination with critical theory, critical race theory, scientism and empiricism.

It opposes the interpretivist paradigms.

Criticism that is sometimes raised against modernism is that the process is too bureaucratic, prescriptive, procedural and structured.

News

ARTICLE 54: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Liberalism

29th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

Liberalism implies freedom.

Does this mean that people should be allowed to decide for themselves how they will live, if they will work or not, if they will commit crime or not, support a particular religion or not?

Or does it mean that the government should protect people against the criminal, decadent, greedy, racist, sexists, etc.?

Liberalism promotes change and reform.

Does that mean that everyone should have the right to own property?

Or does it mean that the government should own all property to ensure that all will have equal access to the wealth of the country?

Are all people in any country really equal before the law?

Or is the law there to protect the rich, the wealthy and the elite?

I discuss liberalism in this post.

Liberalism

Neoliberalism rendered liberalism, in the opinion of some academics, obsolete.

Even so, liberalism is still a relevant paradigm.

Liberalism advocates tolerance, progress, humanitarianism, objectivity, reason, democracy and human rights.

To this can be added a host of other positive attributes dealing with human rights, social interaction and freedom.

This, amongst other things, implies that all individuals in a country have an equal status as legal subjects, regardless of other inequalities and differences that might divide them.

All the elements of liberalism offer valuable fields for research.

In a constructivist spirit, research should utilise observation and experiences to reflect on and evaluate previous perceptions in the hope of understanding the situations and phenomena being investigated.

Understanding should lead to change and reform.

Constructivism is a variant of liberal theory if issues like human rights, freedom of social interaction are investigated.

Neoliberalism also supports or extends some elements of liberalism.

For example, private property rights, a classically liberal state and the efficiency of the free market system.

In other respects, neoliberalism is in opposition to liberalism.

However, neoliberalism is gradually adopting more and more liberal values.

The four central areas in which liberalism and neoliberalism overlap are human rights, non-discrimination, education and the media, freedom of speech and opinion.

Liberalism is a philosophical approach to human interaction.

It is also a social force.

The basic premise of liberalism is the equality of individuals before the law.

In this respect, liberalism links up with critical race theory, critical theory and feminism.

Liberalism is associated with relativism through its relativist conception of rights.

It accuses other paradigms of being relativist to proclaim its own relativism as universalism.

For example, liberal relativism is sometimes rather a neo-colonial tactic designed to maintain the exploitation of developing countries by developed former colonial powers, or new powers taking over the role of colonial power under the guise that they are helping the needy country to grow.

Liberalism is associated with radicalism because both support the struggle for democracy, specifically campaigning for the right to vote, welfare reform and public services, with radicalism adopting a more aggressive stance than liberalism.

Liberalism is in opposition with some values of critical race theory and colonialism because of its favoritism towards the elite, the rich and the noble.

Some academics still associate ‘liberal’ with unrestrained and undisciplined attitudes and behavior.

The strength of liberalism is said to be its most serious weakness.

This is its commitment to emancipation.

Throughout history, liberalists claimed their love for liberty while demonstrating contempt for people of the colonies and for women.

Liberalists are of the opinion that they are entitled to enforce ‘democracy’ upon the ‘less enlightened’.

Because of its authoritarian stance, liberalism cannot be equated with democracy and liberty is not the same as equality.

The second weakness of liberalism is that there is hardly any consensus of what it means.

People’s thoughts about and understanding of liberal concepts such as human rights largely depend on who is in charge, whose side you are on, what you stand to gain or lose because of your point of view if your point of view is legal and politically correct and your position in a social group or community.

A negative consequence of the liberalism paradigm claiming to favor the needy while discriminating between the informed, rich and educated on the one side and the uninformed, poor and uneducated on the other side, is that research on the former often follows an emic approach while research on the latter follows an etic approach.

The informed, rich and educated are regarded and treated as participants in the research while the uninformed, poor and uneducated are regarded as subjects upon whom research is done.

Summary of Liberalism

Liberalism:

Is a philosophical approach to human interaction.

Is a social force.

Advocates tolerance, progress, humanitarianism, objectivity, reason, democracy and human rights.

Offers a valuable field of research.

Uses observation and experience as data or data collection methods.

Supports the equality of individuals before the law.

Is associated with constructivism, neoliberalism, critical race theory, critical theory, feminism, relativism and radicalism.

Is in opposition with some values of neoliberalism, critical race theory and colonialism.

Criticism against liberalism includes:

Supporters of liberalism accuse other paradigms of being relativist to proclaim its own relativism as universalism.

It favors the rich, the elite and the noble.

Some associate liberalism with unrestrained and undisciplined attitudes and behavior.

Its commitment to emancipation is a strength but also a weakness.

Liberalists sometimes adopt an attitude of contempt for people of the colonies of old and for women.

There is a lack of consensus amongst academics about the meaning of liberalism.

News

ARTICLE 53: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Interpretivism

29th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr Hannes Nel

Introduction

Do you think the personal opinions and intuitive beliefs of people can deliver valid and accurate research findings and new knowledge?

Interpretivists do.

That triggers a new question in my mind.

When is data truly valid and accurate?

Is it when it can be proven by means of statistical analysis and laboratory tests?

Or perhaps it is valid and accurate when the majority regards it so.

I discuss the way in which interpretivists perceive the truth in this post.

Interpretivism

Often also called ‘anti-positivism’ or ‘naturalistic inquiry’, interpretivism is a softer and more subjective philosophy than hermeneutics.

We can also see interpretivism as a group of paradigms, including hermeneutics and some other paradigms that I will mention nearer to the end of this post.

All interpretivist paradigms claim that there is a clear and significant difference between the natural and social sciences, with the technicist group of paradigms favouring natural research, while interpretivist paradigms favour social research.

As you know by now if you followed my posts, natural science mostly uses quantitative research while social sciences prefer qualitative research methods.

According to interpretivism, precise, systematic answers to complex human problems do not exist.

Every cultural and historical situation is different and unique and requires analysis of the uniquely defined contexts in which they are embedded.

Social laws, if they exist, should be uncovered through qualitative analysis and interpretation.

Because of the specific social, political, economic and cultural experiences underpinning each study, the findings cannot be generalized.

They do, however, provide greater clarity on how people make meaning of phenomena in a specific context.

Therefore, the interpretivist philosophy facilitates greater understanding of the human condition.

Interpretivists are of the opinion that human life can only be understood from within because norms and values cannot be divorced from the individual.

Human activities cannot be observed as some external reality.

Social reality is viewed and interpreted by individuals according to the ideological positions that they hold.

Therefore, knowledge is personally experienced rather than acquired or imposed from outside.

Reality is multi-layered and complex.

A single phenomenon can have multiple interpretations.

Interpretivism, therefore, focuses on people’s subjective experiences.

On how people “construct” the social world by sharing meanings and how they interact with or relate to each other.

Meaning is, thus, constructed and developed through interaction between people.

In interpretivism, social life is regarded as a distinctively human product.

Interpretivists assume that reality is not objectively determined, but is socially constructed in terms of language, consciousness and shared meanings.

The underlying assumption is that by placing people in their social contexts, there is a greater opportunity to understand the perceptions they have of their own activities.

The uniqueness of a particular situation is important to understand.

It generally attempts to understand phenomena through the meanings that people assign to them.

Human behaviour is believed to be affected by knowledge of the social world.

As our knowledge of the social world and the realities being constructed increase, it enriches our theoretical and conceptual framework.

There is, thus, a two-way relationship between theory and research.

Social theory informs our understanding of issues which, in turn, assists us in making research decisions and making sense of the world.

The experience of doing research and its findings also influence our theorizing.

Inevitably, as theory will be abstract, it gives a partial account of the multifaceted social world.

Such a theory allows researchers to link the abstract with the concrete and the theoretical with the empirical.

For interpretivists, the social world depends on human knowledge.

They believe that our own understanding of phenomena constantly influences us in terms of the types of questions we ask and in the way we conduct research.

Our knowledge and understanding are always limited to the things to which we have been exposed.

That is, our own unique experiences and the meanings we have shared with others.

As we proceed through the research process, our humanness and knowledge inform us and often also direct us.

Often subtleties, such as intuition, values, beliefs or prior knowledge influence our understanding of the phenomena under investigation.

Therefore, to conceive the world as external and independent from our own knowledge and understanding is to ignore the subjectivity of our research endeavours.

Interpretivism pays attention to and values what people say, do and feel and how they make meaning of the phenomena being researched.

Interpretivism pays special attention to the meaning that individuals or communities assign to their experiences.

Patterns, trends and themes should, therefore, emerge from the research process.

Your role should be to understand real-life situations from the point of view of the

target group for your research.

The human mind is regarded as a purposive source of meaning.

Interpretive investigation searches for meaning in the activities of human beings.

There is a radical element in interpretivism in the sense that it investigates real-life events and phenomena.

A concept in qualitative research that shares some perspectives with the interpretivist paradigm, is the notion of praxis.

Some regard praxis as a separate paradigm while others regard it as a research method.

Praxis means acting upon the conditions that you face to change them.

It deals with the disciplines and activities predominant in the ethical and political lives of people.

By exploring the richness, depth and complexity of phenomena we can begin to develop a sense of understanding of the meanings given by people to such phenomena and their social context.

Through uncovering how meanings are constructed, we can gain insight into the meanings imparted and thereby improve our understanding of the whole.

You might have noticed that interpretivism has its roots in hermeneutics.

Both paradigms study the theory and practice of interpretation.

In hermeneutics, the text is the expression of the thoughts of its author.

Interpreters attempt to put themselves within the perception or thinking pattern of the author to reconstruct the intended meaning of the text.

Interpretivism relates to the constructivist epistemology.

Constructivism holds that individuals, in their reasoning, do not have access to the real world.

This suggests that their knowledge of the perceived world is meaningful in its own terms and can be understood through careful use of interpretivist procedures.

The social context, conventions, norms and standards of the individual or community being researched are crucial elements in assessing and understanding human behaviour.

This applies to all interpretivist paradigms, namely hermeneutics, phenomenology, ethnomethodology, constructivism, relativism and, of course, interpretivism.

It also applies to radicalism although radicalism belongs to the critical group of paradigms.

All the interpretivist paradigms pay attention to human interaction with phenomena in their daily lives.

Even though both interpretivism and positivism support social science, interpretivism opposes positivism because of its stronger leaning towards physical science and quantitative methodology.

Some researchers criticize interpretivism for its acceptance of such a large variety of rather subjective and intuitive sources of knowledge and meaning.

Interpretivism is said to lack scientific consistency because conclusions and findings are often based on assumptions.

Summary of Interpretivism

Interpretivism:

Prefers qualitative research methods.
Uses analyses and interpretation of social events and phenomena.
Considers ethics and politics.
Explores the richness, depth and complexity of real-life events and phenomena.
Identifies the uniqueness of social events and phenomena.
Gains new knowledge by analysing intuition, values, beliefs, assumptions, and conversations.
Can change the status quo.
Enriches our theoretical and conceptual frame of reference.
Improves our understanding of social events and phenomena.
Is associated with all the interpretivist paradigms and with radicalism.
Opposes the technicist paradigms.
Is criticised for accepting subjective and intuitive sources of data. AND
For lack of scientific consistency.

Social reality:

Is interpreted according to the researcher’s ideological position.
Can have multiple interpretations.
Will differ in terms of context and time.
Cannot be interpreted precisely and systematically.
Is interpreted through interaction between people.
Is a distinctively human product.
Is affected by knowledge of the social world.

News

ARTICLE 52: Research Methods for Ph. D. Studies: Humanism

25th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

No other paradigm demonstrates as vividly as humanism how radically context, time and motives can impact om the nature of truth.

Under the guise of the promotion and protection of human rights, humanism can be used to promote selfish, often political motives.

Humanism can claim human right in an aggressive and racist manner.

Even so, humanism can also be used for constructive, ethical and honest purposes.

Such is the power of this paradigm.

I discuss the nature and elements of humanism in this post.

Humanism

Humanism is a set of subject matter and arguments on social relationships emerging from ‘enlightenment’.

It is a socio-political doctrine that is not restricted to the boundaries of one society.

It is, furthermore, a cross-cultural concept with internal issues that cover and include all of humankind.

Essentially, it deals with issues concerning human beings.

Like all other paradigms, humanism developed and evolved over time.

We can now define it as an ethical and democratic attitude towards life through which human beings give meaning to life.

It supports the building of a humane society based on human and other natural values in a spirit of reason and free inquiry.

Humanism relies to a large extent on reason and logic.

Except for African humanism, it rejects concepts such as superstition and the supernatural.

It is not a concept that drives humankind’s lifestyle as, for example, rationalism does.

Even so, it is a guiding principle for life.

Humanism belongs to the group of interpretivist paradigms.

Different from technicist paradigms, that mostly identify and describe the causes for events and phenomena, humanism seeks to find the reasons for events and phenomena.

Theory consists of explanation and understanding.

Explanation seeks to make event and phenomena “predictable” through knowledge of their causes.

Understanding seeks to make events and phenomena intelligible through knowledge of their causes, intentions, purpose and meaning.

That is, its epistemology.

The inclusion of understanding expands the boundaries of theory and research to include not only the search for causes of behaviour, but also the task of seeking to grasp its underlying rationale.

The process of conducting research involves developing theory rather than discovering, creating or uncovering meaning.

The researcher needs to utilize observations and experiences to uplift the experiences of the community into academic theory.

It is not always easy to articulate the goals, assumptions, intentions and values of the community to the academic validity, authenticity and accuracy that the researcher is looking for.

Theory is often presented in the form of narratives.

A narrative is an integral way in which human intelligence organizes experience to grasp its meaning.

It usually takes the form of a descriptive diagnosis of a situation.

The value and validity of this type of theorizing is frequently experienced as revelation, the so-called ‘Ah-Ha’ experience.

Sense-making is regarded as a process of creation.

The sense-making function of theory introduces the notion of the construction of social reality.

This implies that the principles and values by which people live are corrigible products of the human mind.

This means that it is subject to constant re-thinking and review.

From a humanistic perspective, the search for independent, antecedent cause will never be enough to explain behaviour because a more complete understanding depends on comprehending the aims, purposes and intentions of the individual.

Intentions are influenced by historical events.

However, intentions are mostly deduced from observation of the evolvement of events and phenomena.

People are not bound by the past.

They adapt and grow as they gain knowledge and experience.

Humanistic views make a distinction between how humanity reacts to themselves within a historical context, whilst affected by a philosophical concept.

People are free to do things the way they want to and to make their own decisions.

Consequently, it is difficult to predict how people will behave and respond to external stimuli.

Although not always predictable, people’s behaviour is often intelligible and decipherable.

To understand the meaning of behaviour, you, as the researcher, will need to look beyond prior causes to search for the research target’s purposes and motives.

Although humanism starts from assumptions, findings still need to be corroborated.

Accuracy, validity and authenticity are important if it is to be accepted as scientific research.

Humanism does not seek generalizability.

Theory and research are used to sharpen, highlight and bring to the foreground as many aspects as possible that make the situation being investigated unique, distinct and different from other situations.

In this respect humanism can be associated with action research.

The sensitizing aspect of humanistic research can also be found in ethnomethodology.

Like interpretivism and hermeneutics, humanism accept assumptions as data and deliberately make such assumptions explicit by developing them into theory through observation and experience.

Humanism can also be associated with critical theory because it seeks to call attention to the problems and deformations of the status quo in communities.

The status quo is challenged by pointing out the gap between it and a preferred state.

Especially academics who support technicist paradigmatic approaches criticize humanism for being ‘essentially contestable’.

Consequently, positivism, scientism and modernism are opposed to humanism.

Different forms of humanism have developed through time.

The following are such forms:

Literary humanism.

Literary humanism is a devotion to the humanities of literature culture.

Rennaissance humanism.

Renaissance humanism is the spirit of learning that developed at the end of the middle ages with the revival of classical letters and the renewed confidence in the ability of human beings to determine for themselves truth and falsehood.

Cultural humanism.

Cultural humanism is the rational and empirical tradition that originated largely in ancient Greece and Rome.

It evolved through European history, and now constitutes a basic part of the Western approach to science, political theory, ethics and law.

Philosophical humanism.

Philosophical humanism is any outlook or way of life centered on human needs and interests.

Christian humanism.

Christian humanism is a philosophy advocating the self-fulfillment of the human being within the framework of Christian principles.

Modern humanism.

Modern humanism is also called Naturalistic humanism, Scientific humanism, Ethical humanism and Democratic humanism.

It is a naturalistic philosophy that rejects all supernaturalism and relies primarily upon reason and science, democracy and human compassion.

Modern humanism has a dual origin, both secular and religious, and these constitute its sub-categories.

Christian humanism and Modern humanism are sub-categories of Philosophical humanism.

Secular humanism.

Secular humanism is an outgrowth of the eighteenth-century enlightenment rationalism and nineteenth-century freethought.

Religious humanism.

Religious humanism emerged out of ethical culture, unitarianism, and universalism.

Civic humanism.

Civic humanism is a historiographical construct.

A multitude of academics and philosophers played a role in the development of the sub-paradigm.

Civic humanism places a great emphasis on the human beings as actively engaged in the world as the center of power.

It considers the human beings as the greatest living beings on earth.

They should rule the world and all other living beings on it.

Human beings display moral and intellectual commitment to maintain examined control through thoughts, intentions and actions.

They are responsible for the stability of nature and the relationships between human beings.

This entails a commitment to an examined life of reasoned consistency in intellectual, practical and moral life.

It generates a common style in the mastery of self, or nature by the rational anticipation of effects.

African humanism.

Research based on an appreciation of African tradition is concerned with human values that are broadly recognized as part of African culture, such as a sense of identity as inseparable from one’s community and a strong sense of collective being and consciousness.

In this context, a person’s merit is judged in terms of his or her kindness and good character, generosity, hard work, discipline, honour and respect, and living in harmony.

South Africans know this philosophy as Batho Pele.

African humanism disagrees with ‘scientific objectivity’ and determinism.

For example, understanding causal relations and the prediction of behaviour are not necessarily primary objectives of research.

Causality may be understood in everyday terms or in the light of African cosmology (belief systems) and does not demand laboratory proof.

The methodology of scientific experimentation is viewed as overlooking levels of human experience which may facilitate transcending forms of existence, such as spiritual and ritualistic dimensions of human life.

African humanism is criticized as being a value system rather than a research paradigm because it cannot be widely generalized, its obsession with an African identity and empowerment, its subjectivity and lack of academic consistency.

Summary of Humanism

Humanism deals with issues concerning human beings. It is:

A set of subject matter and arguments.
A socio-political doctrine.
A cross-cultural concept.
A guiding principle for life.

Humanism:

Stands for building a more humane society.
Relies to a large extent on reason and logic.
Mostly rejects abstract concepts like superstition and the supernatural.
Seeks reasons for events and phenomena.
Seeks to make events and phenomena intelligible through epistemology.
Takes history and assumptions into consideration.
Is associated with interpretivism, hermeneutics, action research, ethnomethodology and critical theory.
Is opposed to positivism, scientism and modernism.
Deduces intentions from observation, experience and development.
Presents theory in the form of narratives.
Values sense-making and a process of creation.
Constantly rethinks and reviews human behaviour.
Strives for accuracy, validity and authenticity through corroboration.
Develops rather than to discover, create or uncover meaning.
Do not seek generalizability.

Different forms of humanism have developed through time. The following are such forms:

Literary humanism.
Rennaissance humanism.
Cultural humanism.
Philosophical humanism.
Christian humanism.
Modern humanism.
Secular humanism.
Religious humanism.
Civic humanism.
African humanism.

News

ARTICLE 51: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Hermeneutics

24th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

Must research be agony and pain to be good quality?

Can research be fun?

Most of you will probably agree that academic research can be interesting, but do you enjoy doing it?

Do you feel guilty when you enjoy collecting and analyzing data?

Why would you do research about a topic in which you have no interest and that is of no consequence to anybody?

Hermeneutics is the perfect paradigm for a topic that can take you on an emotional roller coaster ride.

I discuss hermeneutics in this post.

What is Hermeneutics?

Hermeneutics is the aspect of a study that involves interpreting the event or events being studied.

Originally, Hermeneutics referred to the study and interpretation of written biblical text.

Now it includes the interpretation of any form of communication,

Including verbal, artistic, geopolitical, physiological, sociological, etc.

It strives towards deeper understanding of the political, historical, sociocultural, and other real-world contexts within which they occur.

Language and history play an important role in the interpretation of events and phenomena.

Hermeneutics represents a specific perspective on data analysis.

In terms of communication, hermeneutics views inquiry as conversation and conversation as a source of data that can and should be used for research.

Hermeneutics is not based on theoretical knowledge only, but also includes the analysis of practical actions or omissions.

Hermeneutics is now applied in all the human sciences to clarify or interpret conditions that need to be understood for whatever reason.

Hermeneutics focuses on interaction and language.

It involves recapturing the meanings of interaction with other people.

Hermeneutics involves the analysis of meaning in a social context.

The intentions of other role-players are recovered and reconstructed to make sense of the current situation.

In hermeneutics theories are developed or borrowed and continually tested, looking for discrepant data and alternative ways of making sense of the data.

It is not the purpose of hermeneutics to offer explanations or to provide authoritative rules or conceptual analysis, but rather to seek and deepen understanding.

As a mode of analysis, it suggests a way of understanding or making meaning of textual data.

Objectivity is sought by analyzing our prejudices and perceptions.

Even so, ambiguity is not regarded as an obstacle to qualitative research and it is accepted that interpretation will sometimes be typical and perhaps even unique to a situation or context.

A hermeneutic approach is open to the ambiguous nature of textual analysis and resists the urge to offer authoritative readings and neat reconciliations.

Rather, it recognizes the uniquely situated nature of interpretation.

This means that events and phenomena can have different meanings in different contexts.

From this we can already see that generalized and authoritative theories will seldom result from research making use of hermeneutics as paradigm.

You, as the researcher, are free to accept or reject the interpretations of others, and you can add your own interpretation to the data that you use in your research.

You can also review historical text if you feel that it is necessary.

In the process you will also learn while contributing to the available knowledge in a particular field of study.

Understanding occurs when you recognize the significance of the data that you are interpreting and when you recognize the interrelatedness of the different elements of the phenomenon.

Many human, religious and philosophical scientists elaborated on and added to the nature of hermeneutics.

Two useful elaborations are, firstly the realization that rich data can be gained from expression and comprehension.

And secondly, that hermeneutical analysis is a circular process.

Let me explain this by means of the figure that you can now see on your screen.

The hermeneutic circle signifies a methodological process of understanding.

Understanding consist of two independent processes, namely understanding the meaning of the whole of a text or any other data and coming to understand the parts of the whole.

In this regard, ‘understanding the meaning of the whole’ means making sense of the parts.

Grasping the meaning of the parts depends on having some sense of the whole.

Each part is what it is by virtue of its location and function with respect to the whole.

The hermeneutic circle takes place when this meaning-making quest involves continual shifts from the parts to the whole and back again.

The hermeneutic data analysis process is aimed at deciphering the hidden meaning in the apparent meaning.

Therefore, in analyzing the data you are searching for and unfolding the levels of meaning implied in the literal meaning of the text.

Consequently, in designing your research, you will deliberately plan to collect data that is textually rich.

You should analyze the textually rich data to make sense of the bigger picture or whole.

Understanding requires the interpretation of words, signs, events, body language, artefacts and any other objects or behavior from which a message can be deduced.

Hermeneutics provides the philosophical grounding for the interpretive paradigms, including interpretivism, relativism, ethnomethodology, symbolic interactionism, constructivism and phenomenology.

It is also possible to associate and integrate hermeneutics with critical research paradigms.

Hermeneutics opposes rationalism, positivism, scientism and modernism.

These are all predominantly technicist paradigms.

It is, therefore, clear that hermeneutics is more suited for qualitative research rather than quantitative research.

Some researchers question the circular nature of hermeneutic investigation because setting understanding as a prerequisite for the parts as well as the whole is a catch twenty-two situation.

You cannot understand the parts if you do not understand the whole and you cannot understand the whole if you do not understand the parts.

A second criticism against hermeneutics is that viewing conversation as inquiry can damage the validity of your research conclusions and findings.

Summary

Hermeneutics:

Deals with interpretation.
Uses language and interaction as data.
Seeks to understand rather than to explain.
Deepens understanding.
Involves the analysis of meaning in a social context.
Acknowledges that interpretation can be different in different situations and contexts.
Recognizes the role of history in interpretation.
Views conversation as inquiry.
Is a circular process. AND
Is comfortable with ambiguity.

Rich data can be gathered from how things are said and understood.

Theories are developed or borrowed and continually tested.

Hermeneutics can be associated with all the interpretivist and some critical paradigms.

Hermeneutics is opposed to the technicist paradigms.

Criticism against hermeneutics are that the analysis of data is a circular process and that viewing conversation as data can damage the validity of conclusions and findings.

« Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 14 Next »