Pluralism, Indeterminacy and the Social Sciences: Reply to Ingram and Meehan

This article defends methodological and theoretical pluralism in the social sciences. While pluralistic, such a philosophy of social science is both pragmatic and normative. Only by facing the problems of such pluralism, including how to resolve the potential conflicts between various methods and theories, is it possible to discover appropriate criteria of adequacy for social scientific explanations and interpretations. So conceived, the social sciences do not give us fixed and universal features of the social world, but rather contribute to the task of improving upon our practical knowledge of on-going social life. After arguing for such a thorough-going pluralism based on the indeterminacy of social action, I defend it from the post-modern and hermeneutic objections by suggesting the possibility of an epistemology of interpretive social science as a form of practical knowledge.     

Toward an integrative,pluralistic psychology: On the hermeneutico-dialogical conditions of the possibility for overcoming fragmentation

While casting the long-standing problem of fragmentation in a new light, the recent resurgence of interest in pluralism also poses fresh challenges regarding how this pluralism is to be harnessed in the service of integration. In response, the present paper seeks to vindicate the merits of, and to elaborate on the possibilities inherent in, the hermeneutico-dialogical proposal proffered by Yanchar, Slife and associates over a decade ago, but whose potential has remained underexplored in the intervening period. More specifically, the aim is to gain a renewed hearing for this proposal by foregrounding its distinctive possibilities as a means of harnessing pluralism in the interests of overcoming fragmentation. To this end, following a brief review of the status of the problem, I revisit the merits of integrative pluralism as a response to fragmentation as a prelude to elaborating on how the hermeneutico-dialogical proposal can facilitate this. Thereafter, I focus on elucidating the conditions of the possibility for engaging in the requisite sort of dialogical interaction, and expanding on its epistemological, methodological, and ontological underpinnings. The paper concludes with a brief defense of the practical viability of this proposal in response to anticipated charges of utopianism.     

Beyond grounded theory: The use of a heuristic approach to qualitative research

The grounded theory approach has become established as the qualitative methodology of choice for many counselling and psychotherapy researchers. It is now becoming apparent to many researchers that there are significant difficulties associated with defining what the grounded theory method actually is, and how is should be implemented. In addition, its popularity has tended to keep other qualitative approaches under‐explored and under‐utilised. This paper explores some of the methodological issues raised by the grounded theory approach, before presenting and then contrasting heuristic inquiry as a very different but equally useful form of qualitative methodology. Finally, the notion of researcher as bricoleur will be considered in the light of the need to develop pluralistic approaches to qualitative research in counselling and psychotherapy.     

Speaking for Ourselves: Feminist Methods and Community Psychology

Although feminist and community psychology share a number of epistemological and methodological perspectives that guide their respective theories and research practices, it has been argued that community psychology has not fully integrated a feminist perspective into the discipline. This paper examines how community psychology and feminist research methods might combine to help us better understand women's experiences without essentializing or universalizing those experiences. The authors offer a series of suggested directions for feminist research that may also prove promising for community psychology. Particular attention is paid to feminist social constructionist approaches insofar as they address the complex relationship between epistemology and methodology.     

Doing Community Research Without a Community: Creating Safe Space for Rape Survivors

This paper describes how the values of a feminist research team influenced methodological decisions in a study of rape survivors. Building upon concepts from community psychology and urban sociology, the authors created a community-based research design that respected the emotional needs of rape survivors without sacrificing methodological rigor. We developed relationships with community members in diverse settings, such as nail and hair salons, child care centers, churches, and bookstores, to advertise the study and recruit participants. Consistent with feminist approaches to interviewing, our goal was to create a safe setting for survivors to tell their stories. Although the purpose of this study was research rather than intervention, most survivors reported that participating in these interviews was healing. Our experiences in this project suggest that allowing values to influence the process of research may have beneficial outcomes for both researchers and participants.     

Will the Popperian Feyerabend please step forward: Pluralistic,Popperian themes in the philosophy of Paul Feyerabend

John Preston has claimed that we must understand Paul Feyerabend's later, post-1970, philosophy in terms of a disappointed Popperianism: that Feyerabend became a sceptical, relativistic, literal anarchist because of his perception of the failure of Popper's philosophy. I argue that this claim cannot be supported and trace the development of Feyerabend's philosophy in terms of a commitment to the central Popperian themes of criticism and critical explanatory progress. This commitment led Feyerabend to reject Popper's specific methodology in favour of a pluralistic methodology, but the commitment to the central values of criticism and critical explanatory progress remained . Moreover, methodological pluralism does not imply scepticism, relativism, or literal anarchism. Feyerabend was not a disappointed Popperian, but, in many respects, a die-hard pluralistic Popperian.     

实用主义视域下心理学的多元化

心理学的多元化是指多种心理学研究的共存,它包括认识论水平的多元化、方法论水平的多元化和学科水平的多元化。多元化不是相对主义,它与实用主义具有内在的一致性。实用主义为当代多元化的心理学提供了合理的依据。实用主义多元论认为,各种心理学分支理论在没有被强制整合到同一框架之前,它就是统一的整体。促进心理学的多元化发展,更大程度地发挥心理学的实用价值是当代心理学的发展方向。     

A pluralistic framework for counselling and psychotherapy: Implications for research

Historically, training, research and practice in counselling and psychotherapy have been dominated by unitary theoretical models. Although integrative and eclectic positions have been developed as alternatives, these have not been successful in generating research and have resulted in a further proliferation of competing models. In this paper we introduce a ‘pluralistic’ framework for counselling and psychotherapy and discuss the implications of this framework for research. The basic principle of this pluralistic framework is that psychological difficulties may have multiple causes and that there is unlikely to be one, ‘right’ therapeutic method that will be appropriate in all situations—different people are helped by different processes at different times. This pluralistic framework operates as a meta‐theory within which it is possible to utilise concepts, strategies and specific interventions from a range of therapeutic orientations. The framework is structured around three domains—goals, task and methods—by which therapeutic processes can be conceptualised, critically examined and empirically investigated. These domains, and the relationships between them, are outlined and the collaborative relationship at the heart of the pluralistic framework is discussed. The pluralistic framework provides a means for empirical research directly to inform practice and potential lines of empirical inquiry are outlined, along with findings from a recent study of counselling in schools.     

What is conceptual research in psychoanalysis?1

The development of psychoanalysis as a science and clinical practice has always relied heavily on various forms of conceptual research. Thus, conceptual research has clarifi ed, formulated and reformulated psychoanalytic concepts permitting to better shape the fi ndings emerging in the clinical setting. By enhancing clarity and explicitness in concept usage it has facilitated the integration of existing psychoanalytic thinking as well as the development of new ways of looking at clinical and extraclinical data. Moreover, it has offered conceptual bridges to neighbouring disciplines particularly interested in psychoanalysis, e.g. philosophy, sociology, aesthetics, history of art and literature, and more recently cognitive science/neuroscience. In the present phase of psychoanalytic pluralism, of worldwide scientifi c communication among psychoanalysts irrespective of language differences and furthermore of an intensifying dialogue with other disciplines, the relevance of conceptual research is steadily increasing. Yet, it still often seems insuffi ciently clear how conceptual research can be differentiated from clinical and empirical research in psychoanalysis. Therefore, the Subcommittee for Conceptual Research of the IPA presents some of its considerations on the similarities and the differences between various forms of clinical and extraclinical research, their specifi c aims, quality criteria and thus their specifi c chances as well as their specifi c limitations in this paper. Examples taken from six issues of the International Journal of Psychoanalysis in 2002‐3 serve as illustrations for seven different subtypes of conceptual research.     

Emotional engagement in the context of development and spirituality research

An awareness of spirituality and religion is increasingly being integrated within development theory and practice in order to recognise the way that many people approach community development. There are significant implications for researchers and their methodological practice that arise in paying attention to this area of development studies, particularly with regard to spiritual aspects of emotional engagement for researchers. This paper explores some of those implications from an analysis of my participatory research into geographies of development and spirituality. Two community groups with self-identified Christian spiritualities took part: a Melanesian settlement in Fiji and a women’s church-based group in rural Tanzania. I argue that emotional engagement and spiritual engagement are implicitly connected and demonstrate how attention to emotional knowledge provides valuable insight within this area of research. In particular, I illustrate how a relational approach to emotional knowledge, inspired by the philosophic and psychoanalytic work of Luce Irigaray, is particularly suited to approaching human and spiritual relationships and resonates with key concerns within participatory and community development. Paying particular attention to the concept of fidelity and the spatiality of subjectivity within her work, this paper illustrates the challenge from Luce Irigaray’s work regarding the relational framing of emotional knowledge and the transformational potential implicit within all research relationships.     

Democracy in a Multireligious and Cultural Setting: The Nigerian Context

Nigeria is indeed a typical pluralistic society with innumerable differences in culture, ethnicity, tribe, religion, and class. Yet there exists in Nigeria certain dominant cultures, ethnic nationalities, religions, and classes. In some parts of the country the influence of a dominant culture or ethnic group is more pronounced than in others. This paper is therefore an attempt to look into our pluralism and see how it can enhance the development and promotion of democracy in the country. This paper will address this topic by considering a working definition of democracy and how it is understood and applied in Nigeria; the ethnoreligious politics in Nigeria; postmodernism, democracy, and pluralism in Nigerian society; and the role of religious leaders in the survival of democracy in Nigeria.     

On Being Lutheran In A Religiously Plural World

Abstract : For those of us who are self‐consciously Lutheran, the reality of contemporary religious pluralism engenders important theological questions. The thesis of this essay is that “being Lutheran” within the context of contemporary religious pluralism requires the creation of “Lutheran identity” that is pluralistic in structure, while simultaneously avoiding either theological exclusivism or theological inclusivism. The implications of this thesis are that (1) dialogue with the religious traditions of the world is of primary importance for thinking Lutherans, and (2) the church's witness and mission needs to be reconfigured in light of the practice of interreligious dialogue.     

Vodou: A Sacred Multidimensional,Pluralistic Space

Abstract. This paper uses the language of Vodou doctrine to articulate its key tenets and speak to how the challenge of plurality or diversity in the twenty‐first century has been and continues to be addressed among African and Afro Atlantic spiritual leadership. Following the slave trade and colonialism's aftermath, a pluralistic vision, reflecting the harsh new global order, permitted spiritual sustainability by reconfiguring African ontologisms. Embracing pluralism through annexation of non‐native spiritual practices augmented the power of African rulers, providing them with other epistemes and access to spiritual forces they believed enhanced their position. The issue of preparing for the priesthood in a global or pluralistic society is examined in this essay through the historical and metaphysical framework that shaped the making of our societies.     

Unheard Alaska: Culturally Anchored Participatory Action Research on Sobriety with Alaska Natives

Alcohol research in Alaska Native communities has a contentious history. This project has attempted to address a critical need for research to guide alcohol abuse prevention and treatment with Alaska Natives using culturally anchored participatory action research. The process of grounding the research methodology in the culture and community is described, along with its contribution to community psychology's understanding of the importance of cultural factors. Tensions between indigenous values and ways of knowing, and Western research methodologies are delineated, along with how these tensions were resolved. Important issues that arose in doing culturally anchored participatory action research are described. These included the development of a community of inquiry, key methodological decisions, the empowerment of participants as coresearchers, and flexibility in research implementation.     

A vision of dialogical pluralism in psychology

This paper argues for dialogical approach to pluralism in psychology. We argue that human psychology is both ontologically and epistemologically pluralistic and advocate an integrated approach to disciplinary pluralism based on mutual, dialogical engagement among psychology's diverse traditions. A framework for such dialogical engagement is developed from the standpoint of a hermeneutic understanding of pluralism. Some possibilities for implementing a dialogical approach to pluralism, in terms of intra-disciplinary boundary-work and oppositional contrasts among psychology's diverse traditions, are then considered as ways of promoting disciplinary integration through dialogue.     

Evolutionary consumption

An overview of the field of evolutionary consumption is provided. Brief summaries of disciplines within the evolutionary behavioral sciences that preceded evolutionary psychology (EP) are first offered. This is followed by a discussion of important EP principles including the domain-specificity of the human mind, and the difference between ultimate and proximate scientific explanations. The evolutionary bases of memory, attitude formation/change, emotions, perception (our five senses), personality, and decision making are addressed next, along with specific links to consumer research. Next, I demonstrate how numerous consumer acts could be classified into one of four basal Darwinian modules: survival, reproduction (mating), kin selection, and reciprocal altruism. The paper continues with an exploration of the evolutionary roots of cultural products (e.g., song lyrics) and Darwinian happiness (along with the evolutionary etiology of maladaptive phenomena such as pathological gambling and compulsive buying). I conclude with a discussion of key epistemological benefits of Darwinizing consumer research including greater consilience, increased interdisciplinarity, and an ethos of methodological pluralism.     

Dialectical pluralism: A theoretical conceptualization of pluralism in psychology

A theoretical conceptualization of pluralism in psychology called dialectical pluralism is proposed in this paper. It is argued that this approach provides an effective and efficient basis for scientific progress in psychology. Three primary components of dialectical pluralism are developed. First, drawing on Royce's constructive dialectics, it is contended that tension between competing theories should be sustained in the hope of producing evaluative or integrative solutions. Second, the unity-disunity debate in psychology is reframed as a continuum and it is argued that oscillating periods of convergent and divergent pluralism would provide a productive model for scientific progress. Finally, intercontextualism is discussed as the underlying philosophical foundation for dialectical pluralism. This alternative to both mainstream psychology's positivist-empiricist foundations, as well as competing positions that may be more contextualist in orientation, is expounded as the justification for this new conceptualization. In particular, the limits of a methodological unity based on positivist-empiricist foundations, as well as of a pragmatic pluralism based on contextualist foundations, are both addressed by intercontextualism. As a result, dialectical pluralism may provide a middle ground between these two distinctive factions within psychology, while alleviating the fragmentation of the discipline.     

Methodological Challenges in the Study of Emotions in Politics and How to Deal With Them

This introductory article to the special issue zooms in on the literature on political emotions with a specific focus on methodological questions of “how to study” political emotions. To the extent that methodological matters are addressed in the extant literature, the associated challenges are often portrayed as a clash between social science and natural science disciplines, a clash frequently illustrated by the meeting between political science and neuroscience. Rather than being a clash between academic disciplines, this article argues that many of the methodological challenges facing emotional research have their origin in scholars' diverse views on the relationship between themselves as researchers and political emotions as a research object. In the light of this acknowledgment, the article encircles and discusses the methodological challenges associated with three key conceptual distinctions between: (1) individual and collective emotions, (2) emotions and reason, and between (3) involuntary political emotions and the strategic usage of political emotions. Using the contributions to this special issue as illustrations, the article argues in favor of moving beyond mutually exclusive dichotomies regarding these conceptual distinctions and offers pathways for dealing with current methodological challenges to emotional research. It points to methodological pluralism, transparency, and context‐sensitive research strategies.     

Well-Being and Pluralism

It is a commonly expressed sentiment that the science and philosophy of well-being would do well to learn from each other. Typically such calls identify mistakes and bad practices on both sides that would be remedied if scientists picked the right bit of philosophy and philosophers picked the right bit of science. We argue that the differences between philosophers and scientists thinking about well-being are more difficult to reconcile than such calls suggest, and that pluralism is central to this task. Pluralism is a stance that explicitly drives towards accommodating and nurturing the richness and diversity of well-being, both as a concept and as an object of inquiry. We show that well-being science manifests a contingent pluralism at the level of methodology, whereas philosophy of well-being has largely rejected pluralism at the conceptual level. Recently, things have begun to change. Within philosophy, conceptual monism is under attack. But so is methodological pluralism within science. We welcome the first development, and bemoan the second. We argue that a joined-up philosophy and science of well-being should recognise the virtues of both conceptual and methodological pluralism. Philosophers should embrace the methodological justification of pluralism that can be found in the well-being sciences, and scientists should embrace the conceptual reasons to be pluralist that can be found in philosophical debate.

     

Values in Qualitative and Quantitative Research

The authors identify the philosophical underpinnings and value‐ladenness of major research paradigms. They argue that useful and meaningful research findings for counseling can be generated from both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies, provided that the researcher has an appreciation of the importance of philosophical coherence in working within a particular research tradition. Moreover, the authors recognize that the research world is one of methodological pluralism; they discuss particular critical values central to conducting research and evaluating research findings. Finally, the authors demonstrate that there is not a 1 ‐to‐1 correspondence between a research method and the research paradigm.