oa Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology - (Mis)appropriations of Gadamer in qualitative research : a Husserlian critique (part 1)
|Article Title||(Mis)appropriations of Gadamer in qualitative research : a Husserlian critique (part 1)|
|© Publisher:||Phenomenology Research Group|
|Journal||Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology|
|Affiliations||1 Saybrook University, USA|
|Publication Date||May 2011|
|Pages||1 - 17|
Within the Husserlian phenomenological philosophical tradition, description and interpretation co-exist. However, teaching the practice of phenomenological psychological research requires careful articulation of the differences between a descriptive and an interpretive relationship to what is provided by qualitative data. If as researchers we neglect the epistemological foundations of our work or avoid working through difficult methodological issues, then our work invites dismissal as inadequate science, undermining the effort to strongly establish psychology along qualitative lines. The first article in this two-part discussion provides a Husserlian investigation of the meaning of 'method' for psychology as a human science. This investigation is undertaken in the light of some researchers' appropriations of Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics in the service of non-methodical praxes. The second article will address some implications of the attempt to structure qualitative psychological research along 'Gadamerian' lines, taking seriously the references to Gadamer's work made by researchers such as Van Manen and Smith.
Article metrics loading...