Philosophy & Science Kaleidoscope, ERT, Ph.D. Workshop, of June 2005 University of Limerick, presentation by annette aboulafia, Content Basis problems of Philosophy Philosophy and Science Qualitative investigation and research design

Basic Philosophical Assumptions

The basis of philosophy The Sophists –rejected an objective truth behind the subjective experience --> relativism, pragmatism, subjectivism –monism between Subject - Object The Rationalists (Plato) –distinguishes between the sensual and the non-sensual –the separation between manual and intellectual work –dualism between Subject - Object

Modern Philosophy starts with the discovery of the ‘folio’ between subject and object The basic question of modern Philosophy: –how does humans apprehend categories, forms and values which cannot be deduced from his own experience?

The basis of science Aristoteles (the father of formal logic) made the basis for different sciences philosophy/ logical principles different scientific disciplines

Three basic ways of recognition The ‘science’ of thinking –logic and mathematics (philosophy) The ‘science’ of experience –focuses on empirical observations, humans experiences of the world The science of object –focus on the object itself, not our experience of it –natural sciences e.g. Galilei and Newton.

The concept of Science Science is concerned with its object of investigation –the focus is on the object –the human ability of recognition is taken as given Precondition for science –the world exists –the world can be ’grasped’ by means of concepts Philosophy of science is concerned with methods of investigation

General statements science starts the investigation in the world - not in theories, logic, concepts (e.g. as in Philosophy) science develops theories of the object a theory is a set of abstract concepts that we make about a group of facts or events in order to explain them theories can give explanations to phenomena which can or cannot be directly observed the keystone of science is empirical observation and theories must be empirically validated observation depends on a prior ’model’ of the world (Kuhn) observations are shaped through ‘learning activities’ scientific results cannot be judged on their method. The result is a reflection of the object, not of the method.

Boundaries of Science Science is not well-defined, and it may only be a concept which refers to certain things without having much in common … except some ideals, methods or features of science that are valid for all of them …e.g. …scientific knowledge is more concentrated and systematic, i.e. ‘as much information as possibly, described as simple as possible’. …scientific knowledge can learn us about things, which is beyond the reach of our experience.

Everyday and theoretical knowledge Everyday knowledge –a participating practice –empirical level of cognition –generalisation of factual data –based on direct sensual perception Theoretical knowledge - –the ‘observed’ cognition –theoretical/abstract level of cognition –general principles –based on semantic interpretation, conceptualisation and rationalisation

Three steps in the process of recognition

Characteristics of Science Explanation –fundamental principles and concepts are explanations of concrete processes and events in the world. Objectivity –scientific knowledge tries to avoid subjectivity by various methodological strategies Prediction –is possibly within closed systems, (a part of reality, which are not disturbed by outside events or forces). But this does not hold for other systems (outside laboratory experiments). (Finn Collin, 1993, Videnskabsfilosofi (Philosophy of Science). Folkeuniversitetet. Denmark)

The validity of science Scientific knowledge is general and goes beyond the observable Two approaches to argue for the un-observable: –Inductive conclusion: generalisation based on an amount of observations (often statistical measurements). Cannot give information of none observable, theoretical phenomena. –Concluding to best explanation: allows for deduction of none observable objects, and is validated by its possibility to explain an amount of experiences. (Collin, 1993)

Qualitative investigation and research design Based on Creswell, J. W. (1998), Qualitative Inquiry and research design. Sage Publications “Design is the logical sequence that connects the empirical data to a study’s initial research questions and, ultimately, to its conclusions”. (Creswell, p. 3 quote by Yin, 1989, p. 28) In designing a study, one works with –broad philosophical assumptions, –possible frameworks, problems, and questions –data collections through techniques (interviews, observation, documents, audio-visual materials).

Strong commitment Commit to extensive time in the field Engage in the complex process of data analysis – sorting through large amounts of data and reducing them to a few themes or categories Write long passages because the evidence must substantiate claims (incorporate quotes), and the writer needs to show multiple perspectives Participate in a form of social and human science research that does not have firm guidelines or specific procedures and is evolving and changing constantly (this complicates telling others how one plans to conduct a study and how others might judge it when the study is done). (Creswell, p 16-17)

Questions for discussion How is qualitative research defined? Why do we choose to conduct a qualitative study? What preliminary decisions need to be made? What type of questions are asked? Information collected? Analysis undertaken? How are the data and analysis represented in the narrative? (Creswell, p 14)

How is qualitative research defined? “Qualitative research is an inquiry process of understanding based on distinct methodological traditions of inquiry that explore a social or human problem. The researcher builds a complex, holistic picture, analyzes words, reports detailed views of informants, and conducts the study in a natural setting.” (Creswell, p.15)

Why do we choose to conduct a qualitative study? (Creswell, p. 17) because of the nature of the research question –it often starts with a how or a what – describing what is going on the topic needs to be explored –i.e. variables cannot be easily identified, theories are not available to explain behaviour of participants and need to be developed. the need to present a detailed view of the topic –e.g. the wide-angle lens will not suffice to present answers to the problem in order to study individuals or groups in their natural setting. other reasons?

What preliminary decisions need to be made? Qualitative approaches to design have unique features: A general approach, as a detailed plan is difficult or insufficient given emerging issues that develop in a field study. Some issues are problematic such as e.g. how much literature should be included in the front of the study, how much theory should guide the study. The researcher uses a set of philosophical assumptions (explicitly or implicitly) that guide the study –e.g. knowledge is within the meanings people make of it, knowledge is gained through people talking about their meanings, knowledge is tied to the context, etc. Within these considerations in mind we begin by posing a problem, a research issue, to which we would like an answer. (Creswell, p 19-20)

What type of questions are asked? Information collected? To study a topic, we ask open-ended research questions, wanting to listen to the participants we are studying and shaping the questions hereafter. The questions change during the process of research to reflect an increased understanding of the problem. Qualitative research is extensive collection of data, typically from multiple sources of information. Four basic types of information: interviews, observations, documents, audio-visual materials.

Analysis undertaken? After organizing and storing the data, we analyze them and try to make sense of them. We examine the data working from particulars to more general perspectives (themes, dimensions, categories, etc.). –The interrelated set of activities of data collection, analysis and report writing makes is difficult to know which stage we are in. We (re)present our data, partly based on participants’ perspectives and partly based on our own interpretation.

How are the data and analysis represented in the narrative? Throughout the study we shape our narrative – we tell a story, presenting the study following the traditional approach to scientific research: problem, question, method, findings. We let the voices of our informants speak and carry the story through dialogue. (Creswell, p. 20)