What is philosophy?

Inventory of some philosophical topics: 1. Epistemology 2. Metaphysics 3. Value Theory 4. Logic

Epistemology

Considers questions such as: What is knowledge?

Is ‘justified true belief’ enough? How do we acquire knowledge?

What does ‘rational means’ include? How much knowledge do we have? What is it for a belief to be justified or

rational? Open question

Metaphysics

A highly general or abstract issue about the nature of reality A main subdivision of metaphysics is

‘ontology’, which concerns what sorts of things exist. Do numbers exist? Do non-physical minds exist? Is everything in the universe

interconnected/interrelated?

There are other general issues about the nature of reality, including Do human beings have free will?

Value Theory [Axiology]

This topic includes issues about ethics [moral and ethical values] and issues about aesthetics [artistic values].

Logic

This is the study of the principles of right reasoning. Logic is the basic tool that philosophers use to investigate. What makes an argument valid/strong? What is a sound/cogent argument?

Attempt to Define

Philosophy concerns issues which for one reason or another have not lent themselves to scientific investigation. In some cases this may only be that we haven’t developed the right scientific techniques.

For instance, issues in cosmology [has the universe a beginning in time; is the universe infinite in extent] used to be

regarded as philosophical because there didn’t seem to be any way to settle them

empirically. Now, however, they are thought to belong to physics, and

empirically supported answers have been offered.

Tentative definition:

Philosophy is [1]The attempt to acquire knowledge; [2]By rational means [3]About topics that do not seem amenable to

empirical investigation.

Is this definition adequate?

There are two questions to ask about any definition— Does it include all the cases it should? Does it exclude all the cases it should?

Socratic method (dialectic)

Socrates asks what ___ is

Someone answers Socrates analyzes the

definition and asks questions to show that It’s unclear It’s too narrow It’s too broad

Someone proposes another definition, etc.

What is a chair?

Chairs

Let’s try to define it

Things satisfying our definition

Good Definitions

We want the definition to pick out all and only chairs

Definitions: Problems

What is a chair? “A kind of

furniture” Unclear: What kind?

“A piece of furniture with four legs and a back”

Chairs

Things satisfying the

Too narrow

Too

broad

definition

Definitions and their problems

What is a chair? “A kind of

furniture” Unclear: What kind?

“A piece of furniture with four legs and a back” Too broad: stools,

divans, sofas, benches

Too narrow: bean bag chairs, chairs suspended from ceiling

Chairs

Things satisfying the

Too narrow

Too

broad

definition

How about condition [1]?“attempt to acquire knowledge” This condition may rule out some writings

that are often treated as philosophy. For example, it rules out activism, writing or speech whose goal is to effect change rather than to acquire knowledge. But Marx wrote,” the philosophers have attempted to understand the world, the point, however, is to change it.

Kierkegaard seems to have as a goal to help his readers become religious.

Still, both of these writers also were concerned with acquiring knowledge, and it could be argued that it is only this aspect of their writing that is philosophical.

How about condition [2]?“by rational means”

This condition is rather vague. It may rule out some Eastern and Native American thought, though certainly much of these philosophies is eminently rational.

Even the sciences are known to place some reliance on ‘intuition, hunches, etc”.

How about condition [3]?“not. . .empirical methods”

This condition certainly rules out some topics that have traditionally been thought of as part of philosophy, such as whether the universe is deterministic, whether it has a beginning in time, whether it is infinite in extent, and so on.

Another candidate:

Philosophy is critical thinking about presuppositions. A presupposition is a claim we take for granted and usually don’t analyze. For philosophy, presuppositions are controversial.

Some questionable presuppositions

There is a world independent of my mind.

The future will resemble the past.

Mankind is by nature ‘good’Mankind is by nature ‘evil’

Human cultures develop/evolve/age following patterns that are basically identical.

I can know what the world is like using my senses.

My senses are not systematically deceiving me.

Some persons are morally better than others.

Humans are more important than non-human animals.

Some arguments are better than others.

Something is either ‘true’ or ‘false’.

All people are equal under the law.

The universe operates in an orderly way, that the future will resemble the past.

There is a specific female nature, or gender is socially constructed.

Such is the broad picture of philosophy.

Quantitative vs. Qualitative

Experimental Laboratory-like

control Logical

Positivism

Field research

Ethnography or phenomenology

Constructivist

Both are empirical!

Qualitative Quantitative

"There's no such thing as qualitative data. Everything is either 1 or 0"- Fred Kerlinger

"All research ultimately has a qualitative grounding"- Donald Campbell

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

The aim is a complete, detailed description.

The aim is to classify features, count them, and construct statistical models in an attempt to explain what is observed.

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

Researcher may only know roughly in advance what he/she is looking for.

Researcher knows clearly in advance what he/she is looking for.

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

Recommended during earlier phases of research projects.

Recommended during latter phases of research projects.

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

The design emerges as the study unfolds.

All aspects of the study are carefully designed before data is collected.

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

Researcher is the data gathering instrument.

Researcher uses tools, such as questionnaires or equipment to collect numerical data.

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

Data is in the form of words, pictures or objects.

Data is in the form of numbers and statistics.

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

Subjective - individuals� interpretation of events is important ,e.g., uses participant observation, in-depth interviews etc.

Objective � seeks precise measurement & analysis of target concepts, e.g., uses surveys, questionnaires etc.

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

Qualitative data is more 'rich', time consuming, and less able to be generalized. 

Quantitative data is more efficient, able to test hypotheses, but may miss contextual detail.

QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE

Researcher tends to become subjectively immersed in the subject matter.

Researcher tends to remain objectively separated from the subject matter.

Main Points Qualitative research involves

analysis of data such as words (e.g., from interviews), pictures (e.g., video), or objects (e.g., an artifact).

Quantitative research involves analysis of numerical data.

The strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative research are a perennial, hot debate.  The issues invoke a classic 'paradigm war'.

The personality / thinking style of the researcher and/or the culture of the organization is under-recognized as a key factor in preferred choice of methods.

Overly focusing on the debate of "qualitative versus quantitative" frames the methods in opposition. 

It is important to focus also on how the techniques can be integrated, such as in mixed methods research.  More good can come of science researchers developing skills in both realms than debating which method is superior.

QUALITATIVE MODE QUANTITATIVE MODE

Assumptions Reality is socially

constructed  Primacy of subject

matter  Variables are complex,

interwoven, and difficult to measure 

Emic (insider's point of view)

Assumptions Social facts have an

objective reality  Primacy of method  Variables can be

identified and relationships measured 

Etic (outside's point of view)

QUALITATIVE MODE QUANTITATIVE MODE

Purpose Contextualization  Interpretation  Understanding

actors' perspectives

Purpose Generalizability  Prediction  Causal explanations

QUALITATIVE MODE QUANTITATIVE MODE

Approach  Ends with

hypotheses and grounded theory 

Emergence and portrayal 

Researcher as instrument 

Naturalistic 

Approach  Begins with

hypotheses and theories

Manipulation and control 

Uses formal instruments 

Experimentation  Deductive 

QUALITATIVE MODE QUANTITATIVE MODE

Inductive  Searches for

patterns  Seeks pluralism,

complexity  Makes minor use of

numerical indices  Descriptive write-up

Component analysis  Seeks consensus, the

norm  Reduces data to

numerical indices  Abstract language in

write-up

Axioms About The Nature of Reality

Naturalist Paradigm (Qualitative) Realities are multiple, constructed, and

holistic.  Positivist Paradigm (Quantitative)

Reality is single, tangible, and fragmentable. 

Axioms About The Relationship Of Knower To

The Known

Naturalist Paradigm (Qualitative) Knower and known are interactive,

inseparable. Positivist Paradigm (Quantitative)

Knower and known are independent, a dualism. 

Axioms About The Possibility of Generalization 

Naturalist Paradigm (Qualitative) Only time- and context-bound working

hypotheses (idiographic statements) are possible. 

Positivist Paradigm (Quantitative) Time- and context-free generalizations

(nomothetic statements) are possible. 

Axioms About The Possibility of Causal Linkages

Naturalist Paradigm (Qualitative) All entities are in a state of mutual

simultaneous shaping, so that it is impossible to distinguish causes from effects. 

Positivist Paradigm (Quantitative) There are real causes, temporally

precedent to or simultaneous with their effects. 

Axioms About The Role of Values 

Naturalist Paradigm (Qualitative) Inquiry is value-bound.

Positivist Paradigm (Quantitative) Inquiry is value-free.

Research with Informants (Qualitative)

1. What do my informants know about their culture that I can discover?

2. What concepts do my informants use to classify their experiences?

3. How do my informants define these concepts?

4. What theory do my informants use to explain their experience?

5. How can I translate the cultural knowledge of my informants into a cultural description my colleagues will understand?

Research with Subjects (Quantitative)

1. What do I know about a problem that will allow me to formulate and test a hypothesis?

2. What concepts can I use to test this hypothesis?

3. How can I operationally define these concepts?

4. What scientific theory can explain the data?

5. How can I interpret the results and report them in the language of my colleagues?

The key issues in the quantitative-qualitative debate are ontological and epistemological.

Quantitative researchers perceive truth as something which describes an objective reality, separate from the observer and waiting to be discovered.

Qualitative researchers are concerned with the changing nature of reality created through people’s experiences – an evolving reality in which the researcher and the researched are mutually interactive and inseparable .

Because quantitative and qualitative methods represent two different paradigms, they are incommensurate.

The one [paradigm] precludes the other just as surely belief in a round world precludes belief in a flat one.

Fundamental to this viewpoint is that qualitative and quantitative researchers do not, in fact, study the same phenomena.

Qualitative and quantitative research methods have grown out of, and still represent, different paradigms.

However, the fact that the approaches are incommensurate does not mean that multiple methods cannot be combined in a single study if it is done for complementary purposes.

Each method studies different phenomena. The distinction of phenomena in mixed-methods research is crucial and can be clarified by labeling the phenomenon examined by each method.

For example, a mixed-methods study to develop a measure of burnout experienced by nurses could be described as a qualitative study of the lived experience of burnout to inform a quantitative measure of burnout. Although the phenomenon ‘burnout’ may appear the same across methods, the distinction between “lived experience” and “measure” reconciles the phenomenon to its respective method and paradigm.

This brings us to the reason AIS is an interdisciplinary course.

Considering the breadth and unique challenges of the subject matter—the most effective approach includes using a truly interdisciplinary design.

The idea is to weave a story with the threads of the various disciplines which may more closely resemble the intricate tapestry of the lives of the people studied.