{"title":"SOSYAL BİLİMLERDE ÇELİŞKİSİZ VE SINIRLANMAYAN BİR BETİMLEME İÇİN HERMENÖTİK FENOMENOLOJİ: YÖNTEMBİLİM VE “ORMAN YOLU”","authors":"Ahmet Araşan","doi":"10.18490/sosars.1014233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Founded by Husserl, the new “rigorous science” of phenomenology aims to describe “things” by intentionally reflecting on the experience of the phenomenon in the consciousness. This approach, which was accepted as a return to subjectivity, is widely used in the interpretive social sciences. However, this phenomenology has its own limitations and contradictions when applied in social sciences: the “bracketing” method is impossible to apply, it cannot capture the deeper meanings, it does not focus on social interaction, and it is also suitable for positivist approaches to be applied in interpretive studies. Do these problems mean competent descriptive social research is impossible? First Heidegger and then Gadamer developed hermeneutical philosophies to overcome these issues of phenomenology and van Manen presented a methodology to allow the use of hermeneutic phenomenology to be used in the social sciences. The goal of the present study is to emphasize the problems of phenomenology while adapting it to social sciences. This work, after analyzing the problems of Husserlian description in the social sciences, will cover the basics of hermeneutical phenomenology and the methodology developed by van Manen to be able to reply to the question of “how” together with “what” and the Heideggerian “woodpath.”","PeriodicalId":240052,"journal":{"name":"Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18490/sosars.1014233","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Founded by Husserl, the new “rigorous science” of phenomenology aims to describe “things” by intentionally reflecting on the experience of the phenomenon in the consciousness. This approach, which was accepted as a return to subjectivity, is widely used in the interpretive social sciences. However, this phenomenology has its own limitations and contradictions when applied in social sciences: the “bracketing” method is impossible to apply, it cannot capture the deeper meanings, it does not focus on social interaction, and it is also suitable for positivist approaches to be applied in interpretive studies. Do these problems mean competent descriptive social research is impossible? First Heidegger and then Gadamer developed hermeneutical philosophies to overcome these issues of phenomenology and van Manen presented a methodology to allow the use of hermeneutic phenomenology to be used in the social sciences. The goal of the present study is to emphasize the problems of phenomenology while adapting it to social sciences. This work, after analyzing the problems of Husserlian description in the social sciences, will cover the basics of hermeneutical phenomenology and the methodology developed by van Manen to be able to reply to the question of “how” together with “what” and the Heideggerian “woodpath.”