>What puzzles me the tiniest bit about this debate over awareness of
>how one's approach might be totally wrong is what the heck is the big
>deal. I'd always thought this awareness came automatically with the
>territory of ANY scholarly or 'scientific' endeavour at all - at least
>except when actually engaged in presenting reports to clients in
>commissioned consultant-research.
Nice one Harry! No big deal indeed; but you miss the point of the paradox,
which is as follows...
(The point isn't that positivists never admit they could be wrong.)
The point I'm making is that positivism according to Comte is about always
being _able to decide_ whether you're right or wrong provided the evidence
is there;
whereas constructivism is about deliberately eschewing that position;
which to the constructivist must include the possibility that the
positivists are right;
but if so, then the constructivist position is untenable.
And so, once again: are there any clear minds out there that might help us
start to unpick the paradox? Bill Warren, are you listening?
Kind regards,
Devi Jankowicz
Jako zachete, ostatni moj list do tego mailbase:
******
Harry Oxley writes
>What puzzles me the tiniest bit about this debate over awareness of
>how one's approach might be totally wrong is what the heck is the big
>deal. I'd always thought this awareness came automatically with the
>territory of ANY scholarly or 'scientific' endeavour at all - at least
>except when actually engaged in presenting reports to clients in
>commissioned consultant-research.
Nice one Harry! No big deal indeed; but you miss the point of my paradox,
which is as follows...
(The point isn't that positivists never admit they could be wrong.)
The point I'm making is that positivism according to Comte is about always
being _able to decide_ whether you're right or wrong provided the evidence
is there;
whereas constructivism is about deliberately eschewing that position;
which to the constructivist must include the possibility that the
positivists are right;
but if so, then the constructivist position is untenable.
And so, once again: are there any clear minds out there that might help us
start to unpick the paradox? Bill Warren in Australia, are you listening?
Kind regards,
Devi Jankowicz
******
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%