The traditional positivistic view of research "as the creation of true, objective knowledge, following a scientific method" (Alvesson & Sköldberg, 2000:1) has been thoroughly criticised. However, many empirically orientated social scientists still conceive that "from what appears or is presented as data, facts, the unequivocal imprints of 'reality', it is possible to acquire a reasonably adequate basis for empirically grounded conclusions and, as a next step, for generalizations and theory-building". Alvesson and Sköldberg, in contrast, assert "the ambiguous, unstable and context-dependent character of language, the dependence of both observations and data on interpretation and theory (interpretation-free, theory-neutral facts do not, in principle exist), and the political-ideological character of the social sciences". They argue further that knowledge cannot be separated from the knower and that data and facts are the results of interpretation or constructions.
'Empiricists' advocate the capability of empirical research to reveal reality directly—regarding research as a matter of collecting data, processing and analysing it. Data and theory are seen as indisputably separate, with the value of theory established by testing against data or emerging from data. Such 'empiricists' objected the emergent methodological conceptions and methods of social sciences.
Alvesson, M. & Sköldberg, K. 2000. Reflexive Methodology—new vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage.
Comments