PICKY, PICKY
----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Alexander" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: Testing a research hypothesis
> Dear Luis
>
> I teach Applied Social Research.
>
> As always, the devil is in the detail - and the generalities. I would say
> that your hypothesis cannot be proved or disproved in the 'scientific'
> sense, certainly not without a very clear definition of your terms (which
> is
> in itself a PhD thesis) and a considerable amount of original research.
>
> Perhaps your hypothesis may be better served by rewording it...
>
> Let me put it this way: the question "Is there a God?" is not researchable
> because the restatement of it as a hypothesis "There is a God" cannot be
> proved or disproved using the scientific method. However, the statement
> "People (which ones?) BELIEVE that there is a God" is researchable.
>
> Your hypothesis: "The exclusion of women from roles of religious authority
> is an obstacle to the *integral human development of both men and women*"
> is
> technically researchable but it may be easier to reformulate it as "People
> (which ones?) BELIEVE that the exclusion of women from roles of religious
> authority is an obstacle to the integral human development of both men and
> women." It would at the very least make your literature review more
> profitable!
>
> I'm certainly not telling you how to do research (you have a PhD so I
> imagine you know something of it) however I will further ask this:
>
> - What do you mean by each of the words "integral" "human (other than
> biologically)" and "development"? What, then, does the phrase "integral
> human development" mean? Moreover, what are the known indices and
> metrics
> of it? In the absence of known and generally agreed ones, what are you
> going to determine them to be? To 'prove' your hypothesis you will need
> to
> address this.
>
> - What do you mean by the words "exclusion" and "authority"? Exclusion
> is
> the easier term but you need to say from WHAT specifically. Formal
> exclusion from holding particular roles in religious communities may or
> may
> not be significant unless you can say conclusively (a) that it is
> exclusion
> on DOCTRINAL grounds ("God/Allah/Some Entity decreed"), or (b) that it is
> an
> exclusion on SOCIAL grounds that are readily attributable to the more
> pervasive/extensive inequalities of status and power that feminism
> addresses.
>
> Put another way, does the "authority" that attaches to a particular
> religious role create and perpetuate broader social inequalities, or is
> the
> status and power of a religious role denied to women because of broader
> social inequalities which attribute "authority" solely to men in any case?
> In other words, what is the nature of the relationship between
> 'patriarchal
> oppression' and religion, and how is it shown to be detrimental to "human
> development" (as you define it) in objectively measurable ways?
>
> It is certainly clear to me that, historically, wherever there has been an
> obvious 'co-location' (I hesitate even to call it a correlation without
> the
> evidence) between male-dominated religious hierarchies and a vigorous
> social
> patriarchy then there is also retarded economic and social 'progress'.
> (However, I often hesitate to label much of what secular and more
> gender-equal societies have achieved as "progress". )
>
> One final point, male 'patriarchal oppressors' don't seem to care about
> 'social harm' while the harm is being done to women and most don't even
> examine the consequences of it when an opposing religious patriarchy
> attempts to in turn oppress them - look at Ireland, look at Iraq, look at
> Afghanistan. Look at Africa. Bosnia. The list is long.
>
> Good luck with your project! It's a worthwhile topic indeed!
>
> Kind regards
> Susan
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Group concerned that academia should seek and promote wisdom
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Luis Gutierrez
> Sent: Saturday, 22 August 2009 2:43 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Testing a research hypothesis
>
> Hello,
>
> In conjunction with my project on education for sustainable development, I
> am starting a new research project, as follows:
>
> The *hypothesis* is that the exclusion of women from roles of religious
> authority is an obstacle to the *integral human development of both men
> and
> women*.
>
> If so, religious institutions in which worship is always presided by a
> male
> are a significant obstacle to sustainable human development. And if so,
> these religious institutions should reconsider the social harm they are
> doing and the doctrines being used to rationalize the perpetuation of
> male-only religious hierarchies.
>
> Could you point me to *scientific evidence* (as required in the social
> sciences) that validates/invalidates the hypothesis?
>
> I would be grateful to hear from you.
>
> Sincerely,
> Luis
>
> Luis T. Gutierrez, PhD
> Editor, PelicanWeb Journal of Sustainable Development
> http://www.pelicanweb.org ~ [log in to unmask] A monthly, free
> subscription, open access e-journal.
>
|