Qualitative Curricula in Social Sciences: A Crisis of Philosophy or Techniques

لؤي خزعل جبر
{"title":"Qualitative Curricula in Social Sciences: A Crisis of Philosophy or Techniques","authors":"لؤي خزعل جبر","doi":"10.33282/ABAA.V12I50.710","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The general crisis of research methods in the social sciences\nResearch methodology: philosophy and techniques, founded by philosophers and applied by scientists, and no accurate application of techniques except with a deep understanding of philosophy, as a prerequisite. This fact is almost completely absent from the Iraqi and Arab academic mentality. This constituted one of the dimensions of the double crisis - theoretical and applied - of research methods in the social sciences. As first, there is no philosophy of science, neither as an independent material nor as an introductory subject, but not even an oral confirmation. Secondly, the advancement of quantitative research methods are presented without a background philosophy, as solo methodologies studied in a simple way.\nThirdly, institutional dogmatism does not understand and accept only the quantitative methods familiar and prevalent, within a context of \"foundational ignorance\". Fourthly, administrative research, not the scientific one, based on the outward mentality, and the external motivation that have been formed as a result of long decades of scraping of the scientific mind and as a dedication to authoritarian, opportunistic and formal cultures. All these have cast the researcher away from his professionalism and his cognitive and social interests, in order to turn him into a searcher for an “academic certificate’ rather than a “knowledge”; a searcher for an “interest” not “value”.","PeriodicalId":201372,"journal":{"name":"AL – Bahith AL – A a‚LAMI","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AL – Bahith AL – A a‚LAMI","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33282/ABAA.V12I50.710","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

The general crisis of research methods in the social sciences Research methodology: philosophy and techniques, founded by philosophers and applied by scientists, and no accurate application of techniques except with a deep understanding of philosophy, as a prerequisite. This fact is almost completely absent from the Iraqi and Arab academic mentality. This constituted one of the dimensions of the double crisis - theoretical and applied - of research methods in the social sciences. As first, there is no philosophy of science, neither as an independent material nor as an introductory subject, but not even an oral confirmation. Secondly, the advancement of quantitative research methods are presented without a background philosophy, as solo methodologies studied in a simple way. Thirdly, institutional dogmatism does not understand and accept only the quantitative methods familiar and prevalent, within a context of "foundational ignorance". Fourthly, administrative research, not the scientific one, based on the outward mentality, and the external motivation that have been formed as a result of long decades of scraping of the scientific mind and as a dedication to authoritarian, opportunistic and formal cultures. All these have cast the researcher away from his professionalism and his cognitive and social interests, in order to turn him into a searcher for an “academic certificate’ rather than a “knowledge”; a searcher for an “interest” not “value”.
社会科学的定性课程:哲学或技术的危机
社会科学研究方法的普遍危机研究方法论:哲学和技术,由哲学家创立,由科学家应用,只有以对哲学的深刻理解为前提,才能准确地应用技术。这一事实在伊拉克和阿拉伯的学术思想中几乎完全不存在。这构成了社会科学研究方法的理论和应用双重危机的一个方面。首先,没有科学哲学,既不是作为一种独立的材料,也不是作为一门介绍性的学科,甚至连口头证实都没有。其次,定量研究方法的进步是在没有背景哲学的情况下提出的,作为一种简单的方法来研究。第三,制度教条主义在“根本无知”的背景下,不理解和接受只熟悉和流行的定量方法。第四,行政研究,而不是科学研究,是建立在外在心态和外在动机的基础上的,而外在动机是几十年来对科学思想的刮刮和对威权主义、机会主义和正式文化的奉献所形成的。这一切都使研究者偏离了他的专业精神,偏离了他的认知和社会兴趣,使他成为一个“学术证书”而不是“知识”的探索者;搜索“兴趣”而不是“价值”的人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信