I believe I read your message the right way, but also got my own interpretation. In addition to your view of research approaches as lenses for observing and seeing the world in more detail, I see in your paragraph a message about the nature of truth. This grab my attention in your post and in the actual article.
There is truth, and there is only one truth. But it is not fully attainable. All we can do is reach the best approximations in our time. With each successful research step we come closer and closer to the truth, but we would never be able to fully understand the world. I am not propagating agnosticism. History of science has numerous records of this phenomenon. And this is a major tenet about truth in Historical Materialist gnoseology/epistemology.
That was my take from the article. A lesson that we gradually move towards the core of truth, in a painstakingly hard way, moving very slowly, step by step.
If we look at our knowledge in the basic sciences, it is shockingly inaccurate. No matter what is written in the high school textbooks, most of these positions are temporary conventions. It is shocking that medical practice is built on questionable knowledge. If we follow history of medicine since the industrial revolution, we will see that most of that time, and even now, it is an art based on many false convictions and a lot of personal experience and intuition. And we are talking about a practice that is proud with extensive use of the most develop sciences, the natural sciences. So much about human knowledge, ability to understand, and the current state of science.
Lubomir Popov, PhD
Professor, Bowling Green State University
[log in to unmask]
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 3:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Research Studies, Research Methods
Dear David and Lars,
Thanks for your thoughts.
David, I understand what you’re saying. At the same time, I took a different message from the paragraph. As I read it, Tingley simply says that all research methods are lenses of one kind or another. Each lens affords a slightly different view. Some lenses among the great number of choices afford significantly different views, rendering some things visible while rendering others invisible. Where we are discussing paradigms or perspectives, the differences may be greater yet. To me, that works well without respect to epistemology. But this could always be wrong.
Lars, there is a great deal of writing on these issues — excellent books and articles. For those who wish to read more, I have a dozen books in digital form. When we moved back to Sweden from Australia, we bought a house from the turn of the century between 1899 and 1900. Built on the footprint of a 14th-century house, we had much less room for books, so I digitised much of my library. While I don’t circulate the books, I do sometimes share them with collaborators. If anyone would like to see the books on navigation and cognition, drop me a note off-list.
David Sless wrote: “It's a beautiful metaphor for a realist epistemology. Lovely. But like all metaphors—even those on which realism is based—it has its limitations.”
Lars Albinsson wrote: “Great story!
“Side track: Similar techniques was used in the Stockholm archipelago, which is made up of some 22 000 small islands. My wife’s uncle, who is a commander in the navy, once made a trip with an old fisherman. They went through the archipelago in zero visibility fog, having no sea charts, compass or anything. After a couple of hours the commander said to the fisherman that there is no way he could now where they were. The man angrily steed the boat off track, stopped and said ‘now we are at X island’. The commander saw nothing, but when he went to the bow they were just meters from the X island. The fisherman navigated using wave patterns, as in the NYT article, but also wind changes around islands. The third component was smells. An island where seals rest smells different than one with sea gulls or cormorants or forest or grass and forth.
“There are several studies of the brains of London cabbies, who learn ‘the knowledge’, that is all the streets of London. Their brains are clearly altered by the this.
“I suppose there is something to be said about such ”mind maps” as knowledge? And that building these from theory in school may be different from building them from practice?”
Ken Friedman, Ph.D., D.Sc. (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| Email [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design