When an irresistible epistemology meets an immovable ontology

Jerome C. Wakefield

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The human sciences’ ontology of meanings and quantitative epistemology are at odds. Quantitative methods, although superior for demonstrating validity and generalizability, are not well suited for the reconstruction of meanings, which have been considered the essence of the mind since the cognitive revolution. However, qualitative methods, although effective for studying meanings, do not currently possess adequate validity and generalizability to yield professionally reliable knowledge. There is nothing in the recent surge of literature on qualitative methods, including two new books, that shows how to resolve this dilemma. Radical behaviorists failed in their attempt to solve the problem by reconstructing social science without its meanings. The postmodernist solution that truth and validity do not exist and can be ignored is self-defeating and undermines social work’s aspirations and claims of competence. The roots of the qualitative quantitative quandary can be traced to two opposed Greek philosophical visions of human science that emphasize number (Pythagoras) and meaning (Socrates) as the essence of mind, and we may yet have something to learn about improving qualitative validity from the idiographic question-andanswer method of studying meaning systems pioneered by Socrates.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)9-17
    Number of pages9
    JournalSocial Work Research
    Volume19
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jan 1 1995

    Fingerprint

    epistemology
    ontology
    Socrates
    human sciences
    qualitative method
    quantitative method
    social work
    reconstruction
    social science

    Keywords

    • Epistemology
    • History
    • Onthology
    • Qualitative methods
    • Quantitative methods

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Sociology and Political Science

    Cite this

    When an irresistible epistemology meets an immovable ontology. / Wakefield, Jerome C.

    In: Social Work Research, Vol. 19, No. 1, 01.01.1995, p. 9-17.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Wakefield, Jerome C. / When an irresistible epistemology meets an immovable ontology. In: Social Work Research. 1995 ; Vol. 19, No. 1. pp. 9-17.
    @article{ead580b2a8214b5fbd8a4ece0377d3f7,
    title = "When an irresistible epistemology meets an immovable ontology",
    abstract = "The human sciences’ ontology of meanings and quantitative epistemology are at odds. Quantitative methods, although superior for demonstrating validity and generalizability, are not well suited for the reconstruction of meanings, which have been considered the essence of the mind since the cognitive revolution. However, qualitative methods, although effective for studying meanings, do not currently possess adequate validity and generalizability to yield professionally reliable knowledge. There is nothing in the recent surge of literature on qualitative methods, including two new books, that shows how to resolve this dilemma. Radical behaviorists failed in their attempt to solve the problem by reconstructing social science without its meanings. The postmodernist solution that truth and validity do not exist and can be ignored is self-defeating and undermines social work’s aspirations and claims of competence. The roots of the qualitative quantitative quandary can be traced to two opposed Greek philosophical visions of human science that emphasize number (Pythagoras) and meaning (Socrates) as the essence of mind, and we may yet have something to learn about improving qualitative validity from the idiographic question-andanswer method of studying meaning systems pioneered by Socrates.",
    keywords = "Epistemology, History, Onthology, Qualitative methods, Quantitative methods",
    author = "Wakefield, {Jerome C.}",
    year = "1995",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1093/swr/19.1.9",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "19",
    pages = "9--17",
    journal = "Social Work Research",
    issn = "1070-5309",
    publisher = "National Association of Social Workers",
    number = "1",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - When an irresistible epistemology meets an immovable ontology

    AU - Wakefield, Jerome C.

    PY - 1995/1/1

    Y1 - 1995/1/1

    N2 - The human sciences’ ontology of meanings and quantitative epistemology are at odds. Quantitative methods, although superior for demonstrating validity and generalizability, are not well suited for the reconstruction of meanings, which have been considered the essence of the mind since the cognitive revolution. However, qualitative methods, although effective for studying meanings, do not currently possess adequate validity and generalizability to yield professionally reliable knowledge. There is nothing in the recent surge of literature on qualitative methods, including two new books, that shows how to resolve this dilemma. Radical behaviorists failed in their attempt to solve the problem by reconstructing social science without its meanings. The postmodernist solution that truth and validity do not exist and can be ignored is self-defeating and undermines social work’s aspirations and claims of competence. The roots of the qualitative quantitative quandary can be traced to two opposed Greek philosophical visions of human science that emphasize number (Pythagoras) and meaning (Socrates) as the essence of mind, and we may yet have something to learn about improving qualitative validity from the idiographic question-andanswer method of studying meaning systems pioneered by Socrates.

    AB - The human sciences’ ontology of meanings and quantitative epistemology are at odds. Quantitative methods, although superior for demonstrating validity and generalizability, are not well suited for the reconstruction of meanings, which have been considered the essence of the mind since the cognitive revolution. However, qualitative methods, although effective for studying meanings, do not currently possess adequate validity and generalizability to yield professionally reliable knowledge. There is nothing in the recent surge of literature on qualitative methods, including two new books, that shows how to resolve this dilemma. Radical behaviorists failed in their attempt to solve the problem by reconstructing social science without its meanings. The postmodernist solution that truth and validity do not exist and can be ignored is self-defeating and undermines social work’s aspirations and claims of competence. The roots of the qualitative quantitative quandary can be traced to two opposed Greek philosophical visions of human science that emphasize number (Pythagoras) and meaning (Socrates) as the essence of mind, and we may yet have something to learn about improving qualitative validity from the idiographic question-andanswer method of studying meaning systems pioneered by Socrates.

    KW - Epistemology

    KW - History

    KW - Onthology

    KW - Qualitative methods

    KW - Quantitative methods

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029270675&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029270675&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1093/swr/19.1.9

    DO - 10.1093/swr/19.1.9

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 10141002

    AN - SCOPUS:0029270675

    VL - 19

    SP - 9

    EP - 17

    JO - Social Work Research

    JF - Social Work Research

    SN - 1070-5309

    IS - 1

    ER -