研究的哲学基础与最不发达国家的认识井案例

IF 0.7 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
{"title":"研究的哲学基础与最不发达国家的认识井案例","authors":"","doi":"10.33140/jepr.05.01.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Inspired by an ancient tale of kupamanduka (Well Frog) that never ventures out of the well and lives to think the well as the world, and see nothing beyond it. This article conceptualises the ‘Epistemic Well’ and the native epistemic community that dwells in it remains within the confines of the epistemic well. Philosophical foundations are the core of each individual researcher and all research questions, hypothesis, methodologies, recommendations are shaped by it. Particular modes of governance instil particular modes of philosophies. Under neoliberalism the prevailing philosophical foundations have been identified as, detached, decontextualized, depoliticized, dehistoricized, dissocialized, deproblematized, reductionist/individualist, instrumentalization, separation, marketisation, positivist and objectivist. The combination of these attributes builds the epistemic well. The epistemic well of research is not absolute and is not meant to provide quantification data. The epistemic well is a reflexive tool that can be used to evaluate a research especially for a nation like Nepal. The research funds or the benefits that ensues a researcher are important criteria for research. When thinking of a research topic, the primary determining factor becomes the amount of fund available the gaze of a native researcher can overlook various conditions and processes. The epistemic community that is formed by these researchers maintain and sustain particular epistemes. The NCD’s were selected primarily to stick to a cohort but this does not limit the scope and purpose of the epistemic well.","PeriodicalId":42280,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychological and Educational Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Philosophical Foundations of Research and the Case of the Epistemic Well in a Least Developed Nation\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.33140/jepr.05.01.05\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Inspired by an ancient tale of kupamanduka (Well Frog) that never ventures out of the well and lives to think the well as the world, and see nothing beyond it. This article conceptualises the ‘Epistemic Well’ and the native epistemic community that dwells in it remains within the confines of the epistemic well. Philosophical foundations are the core of each individual researcher and all research questions, hypothesis, methodologies, recommendations are shaped by it. Particular modes of governance instil particular modes of philosophies. Under neoliberalism the prevailing philosophical foundations have been identified as, detached, decontextualized, depoliticized, dehistoricized, dissocialized, deproblematized, reductionist/individualist, instrumentalization, separation, marketisation, positivist and objectivist. The combination of these attributes builds the epistemic well. The epistemic well of research is not absolute and is not meant to provide quantification data. The epistemic well is a reflexive tool that can be used to evaluate a research especially for a nation like Nepal. The research funds or the benefits that ensues a researcher are important criteria for research. When thinking of a research topic, the primary determining factor becomes the amount of fund available the gaze of a native researcher can overlook various conditions and processes. The epistemic community that is formed by these researchers maintain and sustain particular epistemes. The NCD’s were selected primarily to stick to a cohort but this does not limit the scope and purpose of the epistemic well.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42280,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychological and Educational Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychological and Educational Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33140/jepr.05.01.05\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychological and Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33140/jepr.05.01.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

灵感来自一个古老的kupamanduka(井蛙)的故事,它从不冒险走出井,活着,把井当成世界,什么也看不见。这篇文章概念化了“认知井”,以及居住在其中的本地认知社区仍然在认知井的范围内。哲学基础是每个研究者的核心,所有的研究问题、假设、方法、建议都是由哲学基础形成的。特定的治理模式孕育出特定的哲学模式。在新自由主义下,流行的哲学基础被确定为:分离的、去语境化的、去政治化的、去历史化的、分离的、去问题化的、还原主义/个人主义的、工具化的、分离的、市场化的、实证主义的和客观主义的。这些属性的结合很好地构建了认识论。研究的认知井不是绝对的,也不是为了提供量化的数据。认知井是一种反思性的工具,可以用来评估一项研究,特别是对于像尼泊尔这样的国家。研究经费或研究人员的利益是研究的重要标准。在思考一个研究课题时,主要的决定因素变成了可用资金的多少,一个本土研究者的目光可以忽略各种条件和过程。由这些研究者组成的认知共同体维护和维持着特定的认知。非传染性疾病的选择主要是为了坚持一个队列,但这并没有很好地限制认知的范围和目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Philosophical Foundations of Research and the Case of the Epistemic Well in a Least Developed Nation
Inspired by an ancient tale of kupamanduka (Well Frog) that never ventures out of the well and lives to think the well as the world, and see nothing beyond it. This article conceptualises the ‘Epistemic Well’ and the native epistemic community that dwells in it remains within the confines of the epistemic well. Philosophical foundations are the core of each individual researcher and all research questions, hypothesis, methodologies, recommendations are shaped by it. Particular modes of governance instil particular modes of philosophies. Under neoliberalism the prevailing philosophical foundations have been identified as, detached, decontextualized, depoliticized, dehistoricized, dissocialized, deproblematized, reductionist/individualist, instrumentalization, separation, marketisation, positivist and objectivist. The combination of these attributes builds the epistemic well. The epistemic well of research is not absolute and is not meant to provide quantification data. The epistemic well is a reflexive tool that can be used to evaluate a research especially for a nation like Nepal. The research funds or the benefits that ensues a researcher are important criteria for research. When thinking of a research topic, the primary determining factor becomes the amount of fund available the gaze of a native researcher can overlook various conditions and processes. The epistemic community that is formed by these researchers maintain and sustain particular epistemes. The NCD’s were selected primarily to stick to a cohort but this does not limit the scope and purpose of the epistemic well.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Journal of Psychological and Educational Research is a scientific review, appearing biannually, which publishes scientific materials belonging to all the fields of psychology. The emphasis falls on empirical studies, but it may include reviews, theoretical or methodological papers in psychology. Empirical papers with a strong theoretical framework and/or models of computational parameters are particularly encouraged. Theoretical papers of scholarly substance on abnormality may be appropriate if they advance understanding of a specific issue directly relevant to psychology and fall within the length restrictions of a regular (not extended) article. As a journal that focuses on researches within a quantitative, scientific remit, Journal of Psychological and Educational Research places particular emphasis on the publishing of high-quality empirical reports based on experimental and behavioural studies
×
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