epistemological bases of research

7/30/2019 Epistemological Bases of Research

1/20

EPISTEMOLOGICAL BASES OF

RESEARCHBY ROBERT MUDIDA, LECTURERINSTITUTE OF DIPLOMACY AND

INTERNATIONAL STUDIESUNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI


2/20

THE DEFINITION ANDIMPORTANCE OF EPISTEMOLOGY

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy thatstudies the nature of knowledge, itspresuppositions and foundations and its extent

and validity. It is derived from the Greek worldepisteme which means knowledge. All methods of investigation depend on a certain

epistemological basis.

Epistemology is important because all researchis based on a certain vision of human beingsand society. Scholars operate on certainparadigms or perceptual lens about the world.


3/20

IMPORTANCE OF EPISTEMOLOGY

Thus in this sense, methodology has twomeanings:

Firstly, the mechanical aspect of researchmethods dealing with statistical methods.

Secondly, the fundamental assumptions of

knowledge which deals with conceptualquestions and is often ignored.


4/20

IMPORTANCE OF EPISTEMOLOGY(CONT)

A theory or hypothesis should not be acceptedor rejected on superficial grounds.

Theories need rigorous tests. A theory shouldnot be accepted because someone has said so.People can have conflicting theories and wecould all be wrong. Thus a fundamentalproblem is to decide between different versionsof the truth. In strategic and internationalstudies we need to know the basis of ourprepositions. It is therefore important to giveevidence to support the prepositions we make.


5/20

IMPORTANCE OF EPISTEMOLOGY(CONT)

A fundamental problem is that the methods of thenatural sciences may sometimes not be adequate tosolve the problems of the social sciences. Naturalsciences thrive on experiment and prediction, unlike the

social sciences which are less experimentally based. Thus the means of validating knowledge in the natural

sciences may sometimes not be the same as in the socialsciences.

Epistemology therefore helps us to engage in competentresearch and to develop critical awareness in terms ofdetermining which scholarly publications are useful. Wetherefore read texts more critically.


6/20

EPISTEMOLOGICALCONSIDERATIONS

Thus an epistemological issue concernsthe question of what is or should be

acceptable knowledge in a discipline.A central question in this context is

whether the social world can and should

be studied according to the sameprinciples, procedures and ethos as thenatural sciences.


7/20

POSITIVISM IN EPISTEMOLOGY

Positivism is an epistemological position that advocates theapplication of the methods of the natural sciences to thestudy of social reality and beyond. Positivism entails the

following: Only phenomena and hence knowledge confirmed by thesenses can be genuinly warranted as knowledge(this isknown as the principle of phenomenalism).

The purpose of theory is to generate hypotheses thatcan be tested and that thereby allow explanations oflaws to be assessed (this is known as the principle ofdeductivism).


8/20

TENETS OF POSITIVISM (CONT)

Knowledge is arrived at though the gathering of factsthat provide the basis for laws (the principle ofinductivism).

Science must, and presumably can, be conducted in away that is value free (that is, objective). There is a clear distinction between scientific(positive)

statements and normative statements and a belief thatthe former are the true domain of the scientist. This is

because the truth or otherwise of normative statementscannot be confirmed by the senses.


9/20

INTERPRETIVISM

This is a term given to a contrasting epistemology topositivism. It is predicated upon the view that a strategyis required that respects the differences between the

people and objects of the natural sciences and thereforerequires the social scientist to grasp the subjectivemeaning of social action.

The term interpretivism subsumes the views of writerswho have been critical of the application of the scientific

model to the study of the social world. They share aview that the subject matter of the social sciences isfundamentally different from that of the naturalsciences.


10/20

INTERPRETIVISM (CONT)

The study of the social world therefore requires adifferent logic in its research procedures which reflectsthe distinctiveness of human beings in relation to the

natural order. Von Wright (1971) depicted the epistemological clashbetween positivism and hermeneutics which isconcerned with the interpretation of human action. Thisclash reflects a division between an emphasis on the

explanationof human behaviour which is afundamental ingredient of the positivist approach to thesocial sciences and the understandingof humanbehaviour.


11/20

INTERPRETIVISM (CONT)

Hermeneutics is concerned with an empatheticunderstanding of human action rather than with

the forces that are deemed to act on it. Causalexplanation, according to Weber, is undertakenwith reference to the interpretive understandingof social action rather than to the external forces

that have no meaning for those involved insocial action.


12/20

PHENOMENOLOGY

Phenomenology is one of the main intellectual traditions that hasbeen responsible for the anti-positivist position. This philosophy isconcerned with the question of how individuals make sense of theworld around them and especially how the philosopher shouldbracket out preconceptions in his or her grasp of that world.

The initial application of phenomenological ideas to the socialsciences has been attributed to the work of Alfred Schutz. Heargued that a fundamental difference between the natural andsocial sciences is that social reality has a meaning for human beingsand therefore that human action is meaningful. Human beings acton the basis of the meaning that human action has for them and

they act on the basis of meanings they can attribute to their actsand to the acts of others.


13/20

PHENOMENOLOGY

The job of the social scientist therefore is to gain access to peoplescommon sense thinking and hence to interpret their actions andtheir social world from their point of view. The phenomenologisttherefore views human behaviour as a product of how peopleinterpret the world. Therefore, in order to grasp the meanings of apersons behaviour, the phenomenologist attempts to see thingsfrom that persons point of view.

However, taking an interpretative stance suggests that the socialscientist is not simply laying bare how members of a social groupinterpret the world around them. The social scientist will be aimingto place the interpretations into a social scientific frame. Thus the

researcher is providing an interpretation of others interpretations.The researchers interpretations further have to be interpreted interms of the concepts, theories and literature of a discipline.


14/20

CRITERIA OF VALIDITY

This section deals with some insights from thephilosophy of science regarding what constitutes validknowledge.

Karl Popper argued that hypothesis testing serves thepurpose of ruling out theories even though it cannotdemonstrate that a theory is true. Popper urgedscientists to test the implications of their theories bycomparing the implications with relevant evidence.

Popper argued that the method of the social scienceslike that of the natural sciences consists in trying outtentative solutions to those problems from which ourinvestigations start.


15/20


According to Karl Popper, solutions are proposedand criticised. If a proposed solution is not opento objective criticism then it is excluded as

scientific, although perhaps only temporarily.Thus according to Popper his demarcation ofwhat was scientific and what was not dependedon the notion of falsifiability.

Falsifiability is an important concept in thephilosophy of science that amounts to the ideathat a proposition cannot be scientific if it doesnot admit consideration of its being false.


16/20


Poppers theory implied that scientists should give uptheory as soon as they encounter falsifying evidence,replacing it with increasing bold and powerful new

hypotheses. Thomas Kuhn, on the other hand, in his seminal workthe Structure of Scientific Revolutions argued thatscience consisted of periods of normal science in whichscientists continue to hold to their theories in the face of

anomalies, interspersed with periods of great conceptualchange. Kuhn argued that the aim of science is to find amodel which will account for as much of theobservations as possible within a coherent framework.


17/20


As a paradigm is explored to the limits of its scope,anomalies or failures of the current paradigm to takeinto account observed phenomena accumulate. Their

significance is judged by the practitioners of thediscipline. But no matter how large the anomalies thatpersist, Kuhn observes, the practising scientists will notlose faith in the established paradigm as long as nocredible alternative is available.

In time challenging paradigms emerge which mayeventually replace the old ones in which case a paradigmshift has occurred.


18/20


Lakatos a Hungarian philosopher tried to resolve the perceivedconflict between Poppers falsfication and Kuhns paradigms. ForLakatos what we think of as theories are actually groups of slightlydifferent theories that share some common idea which he calls thehard core. These are known as research programmes. The

scientists involved in the program will shield it from falsificationattempts behind a protective belt of auxiliary hypotheses.

Instead of asking whether a hypothesis is true or false, Lakatosencourages us to ask if a research programme is progressive ordegenerative. A progressive research programme is marked by itsgrowth along a discovery of stunning novel facts. A degenerative

research programme is marked by a lack of growth, or growth of aprotective belt that does not lead to novel facts.


19/20


In his books Against Method and Science in AFree Society, Feyerabend developed the ideathat there are no methodological rules which arealways used by scientists. He objected to anysingle prescriptive method on the grounds thatsuch a method would limit the activities of

scientists, and hence retard scientific progress.In his view science would benefit most from anattitude of theoretical anarchism.


20/20

THE END

THANK YOU

epistemological bases of research

Documents