|
Ontological and Epistemological assumptions
Interpretive research rests on assumptions (epistemological,
ontological, and methodological) that will be presented in more detail later,
but it draws on a ‘phenomenological ontology’ that has its sources in Hegel,
Heidegger, Ricoeur and others. [see philosophical
grounding] This is a non-dualistic ontology: one that seeks to avoid
the dualism of mind and matter for which Descartes is famous.
The empirical-analytic paradigm, in contrast, is the historical
product of two apparently opposed conceptions of knowledge and investigation
that turn out, on closer examination, to share a common, underlying ontology,
an ontology of two separate realms: mind and matter. These two are rationalism
and empiricism.
Rationalism:
In this conception, knowledge is the product of reflection
and reasoning, based in fundamental formal (and hence indubitable) principals
or axioms, from which subsequent truths are logically derived. An early
form of this can be found in Descartes' writing, where the cogito (‘I think,
therefore I am’) provided an archimedian point from which to deduce the
existence of god. ones own existence, the reality of the external world,
etc.
Empiricism:
In this conception, knowledge is the product of perception,
observation, based in sense-data that are combined to form complex conceptions.
These sense-data are interpretation-free facts that provide a foundation
to knowledge, guaranteeing its validity. An early example is provided by
John Locke, for whom the senses provided ‘simple ideas’ whose ‘association’
gives rise to ‘complex ideas.’
Empirical-analytic:
In both rationalism and empiricism it is believed that an
objective epistemological foundation can be found that will justify claims
to valid knowledge, without reference to authority (divine or otherwise),
or to speculative metaphysics. For rationalism the foundation is provided
by reason, rationality, logic. For empiricism it is provided by the brute
data of sensation, of experience.
The empirical-analytic conception of inquiry appeals
to both of these foundations. Inthis conception, knowledge comes from
systematic testing of hypotheses, through experimentation (or quasi-experimentation).
Measurement (including psychological testing) provides an objective, interpretation-free
record of empirical regularities. Formal logic, especially the rules of
statistical inference, allows both summary descriptive statements and
testing of explanatory (causal) models.
But these conceptions of inquiry founder on epistemological
conundra that have their source in underlying--and often denied--ontological
assumptions. A mental-material dualistic ontology introduces problems
that cannot be overcome. Knowledge (mental) is about things in the world
(material). Valid knowledge corresponds to the way things really are:
but how can this correspondence ever be assessed? Neither observation
nor reasoning can provide this guarantee--they are not the interpretation-free
foundations they have been claimed to be.
In short, empirical-analytic inquiry assumes, still, that
there are epistemological foundations to inquiry. This assumption is abandoned
as fruitless by interpretive research.
Hermeneutics
Interpretive research is hermeneutic in character.
This too is something we shall examine in more detail later, for now it
suffices to say that hermeneutics is the reading, the interpretation, of
messages and texts. Hermes was messenger of the Greek gods; the term ‘hermeneutics’
was first applied self-consciously to biblical interpretation in the C17,
and to interpretation of secular texts in the C19.
A few basic but important points: A text must be read to
make sense: one must first know the language in which it is written. Second,
any text is open to more than one reading: texts show plurivocity, plurivocality.
Third, texts are read in context: the text/con-text relation is a crucial
one that will be central to our investigations.
But interpretive research works with action as well as
texts; human action can be fixed as a text-analog (with consequences that
Paul Ricoeur has described).
Descriptive or Explanatory?
It is sometimes said that interpretive research can only be
descriptive, not explanatory. We shall see that this is not the case; at
a certain point description rolls over into explanation.
The ordinary, everyday character of understanding
I’ve said that interpretive research doesn’t seek an epistemological
foundation. Instead, inquiry begins with the ordinary, everyday human understanding
we have of one another. It doesn’t end there, but this is where it starts.
We start, that is to say, with the everyday grasp of people,
actions and events that comes from being a participant, a practitioner.
No ‘transendental attitude’ here! Just a willingness to be reflective,
self-critical, thorough, and to assume that what other people do is sensible,
not ‘crazy.’
This is a kind of inquiry relevant to both researchers and
practitioners (clinicians, educators).
One outcome is a sharpening of ones perception, an increase
in insight, and sensitivity to what goes on in ordinary conversation and
interaction; to the ongoing work of human relationship that we take for
granted because it is ubiquitous.
Depth hermeneutics
A quick word on the difference between two kinds, or levels,
of interpretive inquiry. A distinction is often made been a hermeneutics
of everydayness and a depth hermeneutics, or a critical hermeneutics. The
latter is often associated with the work of Freud, Marx, Nietzsche, each
of whom asserted that things are not what they seem, because of the operation
of censorship, repression, ideology, oppression, systemic distortion, silencing,
coercion.... (The two divisions of ‘Being and Time’ correspond each to one
of these kinds of inquiry.)
A hermeneutics of everydayness seeks to illuminate and
articulate what generally goes unnoticed because it is ubiquitous, common-place,
and everyday. A depth hermeneutics seeks to uncover what has been hidden,
covered over, and disguised.
A hermeneutics of everydayness is always needed first;
this alone easily requires a semester to begin to master, and enables
discovery of some very interesting and powerful phenomena.
|
|
