Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘science’

I noticed a common theme that seems to thread itself throughout the articles we read on qualitative research, especially the Denzin and Lincoln article.  It appears qualitative research is perceived as a form of criticism rather than a science.  In the Denzin and Lincoln article, they state, “The work of qualitative scholars is termed unscientific, or only exploratory, or subjective.”  In other words, qualitative research does not present an exact answer, number, or end like objective science.  Therefore, it must be a false science.  I think this is quite a silly speculation.  There are many things that we can only find the answer to subjectively, which objective science is incapable of answering.  For instance, we cannot objectively understand what it feels like to live in poverty or to experience grief as a result of a death in the family.  These experiences can only be understood subjectively, through the lips of those who have endured these conditions.  Objective science cannot give us an exact answer to these dilemmas, but subjective “science” can give us a multitude of answers.  In fact, subjective science can also be perceived as more helpful than objective science sometimes, because, unlike objective science, subjective science provides more than one way out.  It provides multiple ways to understanding.  Sometimes, it is more accurate to have more than one answer.

Read Full Post »