ARAŞTIRMA YÖNTEMLERİ

Ontology is a particular focus area within metaphysics, which focuses particularly on the study of “being” or “existence.” The term ontology also comes from the ancient Greek roots, from “ontos” which means “being”, “to be” or “to exist” and from “logos” which means “the study of.” Thus, ontology can be defined as the philosophy or the study of being or existence. Thus, ontology focuses on questions related to abstract concepts such as “what is it mean to exist?”, “What is the unchanging substance of the existing things?”, “Is there an objective, unchanging reality beyond human perception and conception?” and so on.

Epistemology can be defined as the philosophy of
knowledge, or the study of knowledge. Epistemology,
thus, is also referred to as the theory of knowledge.
Epistemology focuses on answering such questions
as “what is the nature of coming to know?”, “what
are the foundations or sources of knowledge?”
and “what are the limits of human knowledge?”

Ontology is a concept that means the study
of being/existence and the nature of reality.
Ontology asks questions such as “What is
the essential substance of (or the underlying
foundation of) existence?”, “What is the nature of reality?” and “Is it possible for us to perceive reality as is?”

Epistemology is concerned with the sources of
our knowledge and how we come to know about
the world and reality. There have been two major
epistemological positions about the sources of
human knowledge. These positions are known as
rationalism and empiricism, and they defend
opposing views. Both of these positions have a role
in methods of scientific practice.

According to direct realism, human reality of the external world is
perceived directly from the natural/physical world.
In other words, the reality of the external, physical
world exists exactly as is perceived by us, hence direct.

for the empiricists, all knowledge is a posteriori, that is, it comes from experience or is dependent on experience. Thus,
empiricism does not have any claim about existence
of any underlying reality beyond experience

The case of “all swans are white” is a famous allegory in philosophical circles, which clarifies the problem of inductive generalization.

Descartes was the first philosopher in modern
era who proposed a method of science based on
deductive reasoning. He defended a rationalist
epistemology and believed that certain ideas
are innate and they provide the foundation for
development of further knowledge through
reasoning.

Anomaly: An anomaly is defined by Kuhn
as a deviation of the “paradigm-induced
expectations that govern normal science”
(Kuhn, 1962, pp. 52-53).

In summary, the position of interpretive
qualitative approach is:
Ontologically: All reality is not given (objective)
but constructed. Natural reality is constructed by the
scientists, social reality is constructed by the social
actors (members) and knowledge of it is constructed
by the social scientists who study those realities.

Spiral cycle of science includes Crisis, normal science, paradigm shift, anomaly and revolution

According to positivism, information derived from sensory experience, interpreted through reason and logic should be the basis of all knowledge. Thus, this theory rejects inclusion of metaphysical considerations because metaphysics does not take the sensory experience as a reliable source of the external reality and doubts whether we are able to perceive reality as is.

Rationalism is most often associated with ReneDescartes (1596-1690) in modern philosophy. However, the ancient philosopher Plato is also known as a radical rationalist. Rationalism defends the idea that knowledge that is obtained through the senses lack certainty, because senses often deceive us; for example, a stick put in water seems to us as if it is bend, even though in reality it is not bend.

Idealism argues that there is no material, or nophysical external world that is the basis of our reality.Thus, our reality does not correspond to a reality existing independent of our minds. Further, what we perceive are just ideas in our minds. Thus, there is no ground to claim that our reality comes from an objective reality of an external physical world. Only one world exists, that is the immaterial world of the minds and spiritual things.

Thus, inductivism involves generalization from observed singular cases to an all-inclusive-theory. Thus, inductive generalization involves an inference to be drawn from past observations to future observations, from what is already experienced to that which is not yet experienced. Thus, validity of any inductive conclusion assumes that nature acts in a regular way, however there is no guarantee that the things will happen in the same way in future, this issue is known as the problem of induction. It is called ‘problem’ because it is always possible that one or more future cases will have a disconfirming case. Thus, inductivist theories provide probabilistic knowledge at best, or provide knowledge that is based on what is observed so far.

Descartes was the first philosopher in modern era who proposed a method of science based on deductive reasoning. He defended a rationalist epistemology and believed that certain ideas are innate and they provide the foundation for development of further knowledge through reasoning.

All of the items are true about paradigm.

The process during normal science is similar to puzzle solving; in the sense that puzzles provide overall rules for the game which establish a framework that structures an individual’s activity of solving the puzzle, the paradigm provides the same structure for the individual scientists. However, such a framework does not strictly define the moves. Rather, it allows opportunities for creative moves of the individual players, or the scientists. Once one learns the rules, they can solve any puzzle given they are dedicated and act creatively, even though solving some puzzles can be harder than the others.

Overtime, the unsolvable problems start growing and anomalies start to accumulate. Even the most brilliant masterminds can’t solve these problems under the current paradigm. When this happens, the field enters into a phase of crisis (C). Only then, the community starts questioning the basic assumptions of their current theory. And, searches began for new ideas, for new ways of approaching problems; and competing schools of thought starts emerging, each offering their own distinctive views on how to deal with these problems. When this happens, the field enters the phase of revolutionary science (R). Revolutionary science is similar to pre-science in that there is a lack of consensus in both phases, because there are rival ideas coming from competing schools of thought. Again, over time, an individual or a group comes up with superior ideas and their ideas begin dominating, thereby paradigm shift (PS) takes place as the previously accepted theory is replaced by a new theory. Thereby, the field enters a next phase of normal science (N2). Thus, theory testing takes place only during revolutionary science. And, science has a cycle from normal science to revolutionary science and back to a new phase of normal science (N2) and to new phase of revolutionary science (R2) and so on. The process moves in a spiral like cyclical process.

Philosophers such as Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951), Alfred Schutz (1899- 1959), Michel Foucault (1926-1984) and Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) also argued that human activity is socially, culturally and historically situated. This meant that the reality changed over time and across cultural groups. This further meant that, reality is constructed; it is socially, culturally and historically constructed phenomena. This also meant that reality is multiple. Wittgenstein particularly argued for how language practices, collective activities and life forms were central to meaning, hence to the process of reality construction. Schutz particularly argued for centrality of meaning to the reality of everyday activities and social life. Foucault went a step further and argued how our most basic constructs like gender was socially and culturally constructed. These accounts collectively pointed to the shortcomings of the positivist approach.