POSITIVISM vs. INTERPRETIVISM DEBATE
Epistemology and Ontology
For my part, however, I no longer want to be labeled as a positivist researcher or an interpretive researcher. It is time for us to move beyond labels and to see the underlying unity in what we are trying to achieve via our research methods. The commonalities in my view are compelling and paramount. We ought to celebrate them because they underpin the value of our role as scholars. The differences, on the other hand, are ancillary. We should understand them, but they should not divide us. The challenge for us now is to rethink and develop a new rhetoric so we come to a deeper understanding of the metatheoretical assumptions that underlie our research. (Weber, 2004, X)
Weber's declaration is at the heart of this paper's examination. The paper attempts to gauge the frameworks of three articles in relation to Weber's concerns and ideas. Weber contends that the debate between positivism and intrepretivism is unnecessary and hampers research. The paper seeks to test the frameworks of the articles to see which ideas or combination of ideas provides the best explanation as to why this debate continues to persist. Ultimately the paper argues that it is the combination of Realistic Conflict Theory and Perspective Making & Taking that work best so as to provide an explanation for the debate's continued existence.
Weber states what his own thoughts are regarding the debate. He provides a few reasons or suggestions as to why the debate exists at all and continues to flourish in the research community.
I suspect that one major reason has been the difficulties positivists have in understanding the arcane language used by some interpretivists language that is rooted in the works of certain philosophers. If in the first place one does not understand clearly the alleged differences between positivism and interpretivism, it is easy to understand why one engages in any debunking exercise with some fear and trepidation…if we used simple language rather than arcane language when we engaged in discourse....
Epistemology and Philosophy of Socrates and Plato Epistemology is the theory of knowledge. It attempts to answer such questions as: How does one acquire one's knowledge? What is knowledge? What is possible for us to truly know? Epistemological inquiry also deals with skepticism regarding certain claims of the true nature of knowledge. Ontology is the science of being. Ontological inquiry attempts to answer the fundamental questions of existence, and thus is
The research too has to be reliable and valid cohering to an internal and external scientific definition of reality that is more physical and eschews the metaphysical and the abstract. Ontological Basis Positivism accepts a certain reality of existence and insists that this reality can be discovered by universal and immutable scientific / mathematical principles (Tribe, 2009) . Epistemological Basis The researcher has to distance himself as much as possible from his research
Ontological Presence and Activity of the Living Lord Jesus within and Through the Christian. Christianity's real meaning is described as an ontological instead of epistemological. The phrase "ontology" is deduced from two Greek words: ontos signifying 'being" and logos signifying "study" and illustrating 'study of the logical consideration of." Ontology is defined as the philosophical study of being. It takes into account the whole subject of existence and being. Most
Ontology Essay Introduction Ontology is a branch of philosophy that deals with the nature of existence and reality. It seeks to understand what it means for something to exist and what kinds of things exist in the world. Ontology examines the relationships between various entities and how they interact with each other. In other words, ontology is concerned with the fundamental categories of being and how they are organized. One of the key
Of course Marx and Russell are radically different on certain aspects of materialism in the physical world. Indeed, Russell spent volumes on taking issue with various aspects of Marx's dialectical materialism (Ironside, 1996, p. 26). Russell comes from the perspective of Fabian Socialism where change can be gradual. Marx is a complete revolutionary who believes that change can only come from a violent overthrow of the present order. For
Philosophy of Science, Paradigm, Epistemology, and Ontology Note that defining philosophy of science is different from asking you about your personal philosophy of your discipline, such as your philosophy of education, or your philosophy of management. • The distinction between and among these terms • An explanation of why these terms are important for researchers to know Philosophy of science, paradigm, epistemology, and ontology Philosophy as a discipline concerns itself with understanding the pursuit
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now