I definitely need help defining myself in this area because what I think I am is pretty much shunned by our field. I believe that I am a fundamentalist and a positivist. This may simply come from my science background, or I may be way behind the times in figuring things out. I believe in capital T Truths that can be discovered by looking at a problem in different ways. For instance, simply because a person in Seattle describes the sun as hazy because it's seen through clouds and a person in Las Cruces describes the sun as bright because it is not blocked does not mean that what the sun is has changed in any way. The fundamental Truth of what the sun is remains the same. As far as I understand it, positivists simply believe that the Truth can be found, correct?
Now, what I'm not sure about is why these two views are mocked in our field. Before I put myself out there and say really stupid things that have already been proven to be false, I'd like feedback on what you all believe about these views.
~Tanya
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you hit upon the big issue over 'T' and 't' definitions of truth. Who decides which is the true truth? I tend to lean towards the fundamentalist approach in this case to help clear the fog... or haze... in Seattle and San Francisco... But then I also think, it is the way the sun is at a given place that is relevant to the people's way of life, right? Not the way it truly is, wherever else that may be. Would the contextualist approach be a more fruitful one then???
ReplyDeleteTanya-
ReplyDeleteI don't think you are going out on a limb at all to align yourself with a positivist approach. It is a valid research standpoint that many people - both in and outside of our field - align themselves with as well. The thing to remember about these paradigms/worldviews is that like so many of the terms we use in research in general they are slippery and imprecise and difficult for most of us to take on in full. Most of us, I think, live in the in-betweens. The important thing is not to feel that you have to change your worldview completely, but that you begin to feel comfortable talking about that view and how it relates to you and your work.
The reason I think many folks in comp/rhetoric/English studies tend to shy away from a positivist approach is our alegiance to narrative and the belief that multiple truths are possible through multiple stories. My stance is that none of us are "right" - just that we need to learn how to talk to one another. What do you guys think?
Jen
Tanya,
ReplyDeleteFirst, if you're a positivist, then you're a positivist. I don't think you should feel bad about it. You gotta be you. I am curious as to what you mean by "fundamentalist" as it applies to the discussion, though.
Purely my opinion here, but for me, positivism holds to a couple of main beliefs: (1) That there is an objective reality, and (2) that people can know this reality and accurately describe it.
I too believe in an objective reality, Truth with a capital T. But, in general, I don't think we can claim to know it and accurately describe it. There are various reasons for this, and it's all a huge onion as to why not, but at a high level, what we come to "know" and describe is a construction that we have agreed upon. There isn't any reason to believe such a construct is Real or True beyond our conceptualization.
I'm a firm believer in what I've said, but I would also say that the positivist approach is not necessarily pointless. It works extremely well in certain fields. But, I would say that "works" doesn't mean it uncovers and identifies an Absolute; it simply functions acceptably flawlessly within the construction of which it's a part.
regards,
aaron
Tanya,
ReplyDeleteI can understand where you are coming from in trying to define yourself. I don't think that you are off though in defining yourself as a positivist. From everything that we have talked about in classes over the last year it is a perfectly accepted approach to take (even if it is not the most widely accepted.) I don't believe that matters as much as how the research comes out of what you are doing. If that is what works best for you and gets the results then that is the direction that you should go. Who knows...once you get started it's possible that you could shift a little and have to include some areas you may not have expected.