On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 Jack Whitehead <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
'objectivity of scientific statements lies in the fact that they can be
inter-subjectively tested. (Popper, 1975, p.44)
and
'When asked about the 'objectivity' of practitioner-researcher accounts I
usually point to the grounding of 'objectivity' in 'intersubjective
criticism'
What is your view of this stance put forward by William Hall in 2006, Jack?
(Inside Knowledge Volume 9, issues 7) Do you agree with his view of Polanyi?
'Polanyi takes a narrow and subjective concept of what knowledge is. To him
the ‘truth’ of any claim to know is ultimately found in personal faith and
belief. By contrast, Popper, a professional philosopher, took a broader view
of knowledge – encompassing objective as well as subjective forms. Popper
agrees with Polanyi that all forms of knowledge are subjectively
constructed. However, he argues that although claims to know about the world
can never be proven to be true (fallibilism), they may approach truth
through continued testing against the external reality and inter-subjective
criticism.
Hall seems to be making the point that Popper was saying that testing has to
go beyond intersubjective testing. Where is the external reality in relation
to account written by living educational theorists about their own practice?
Kind regards to all,
Sarah
|