Philosophy
Similar to what the group members portend concerning the issue of objective and subjective research. An array of answers has strived to argue that objective refers to facts, while subjective refers to interpretations, feelings, and opinions. Nevertheless, in some context, I think that is an accurate evaluation; however, it does not get to the epicentre of what those two phrases connote or how they may differ. I believe that subjective research generally portends to the subjective experiences of the participants of the research and to the fact that the perspectives of the research participants are integrated within the process of research instead of being detached from it.
Nonetheless, objective research portends to describe factual and realities deemed as correct, which is independent of those participants involved in the study. Even though objective research is a more clear perception of how research can be approached, it is a significant distinction to fathom about. Furthermore, I believe that these two perceptions, when it comes to research, also depend on philosophy and the different branches of philosophy.
Foremost is to comprehend the term research philosophy, and it portends the unique frameworks which assist in guiding researchers to order, convey, and assess scientific information on the research. Furthermore, it connotes the hypothesis on and orientations towards the world and the knowledge in it. Consequently, one may ponder what we need philosophy in research for? It is primary for providing pattern maps for the existing knowledge; at the same time, it allows for the comprehension and evaluation of arguments and statements put forward by other members of the research team.
Therefore I will use the concepts of philosophy that include epistemology axiology and ontology to describe the objectives and subjective aspects when it comes to the team research. Commencing with the ontological approach, and surprisingly it connotes the inquiry on the nature of existence and also reality; it is the study of beings in research. At the same time, it deals with reality. This type of philosophical approach has two broad categories, called realism and social constructionism. Moreover, there is only a single realism, and this social reality is objective; it is external and autonomous of the people who perceive it.
Therefore in simpler words, ontology involves the primary query of whether social bodies should be viewed as objective or somewhat subjective. In terms of objectivism, it portends that social objects exist in realities that are external to the concerned social actors with their being. Furthermore, objectivism is a position of ontology which commends that societal phenomenon, and their definitions have an independent being to that of the societal actors.
Subjectivism, which is also referred to as interpretivism or social constructionism, is a bit diverse to objectivism as it views the communal phenomena as formed by the opinions and the resulting behaviour of the social actors that are apprehensive with their being or continuation. Therefore I think that it is primarily for the identification of ontology at the start of the research course since it will assist in the selection of an appropriate design for the research.
Nevertheless, the epistemological position of philosophy connotes two aspects that include positivism and interpretivism. The principles of positivism commend that the social world exists externally; thus, the properties of the social world can be measured via objective techniques. In contrast, interpretivism principles argue that the social world is different from the natural world. Hence it required to be studied differently. Epistemology deals with the knowledge sources, and it is explicitly apprehensive with the nature, possibilities, sources, and precincts of the knowledge in the research study.
Consequently, it can be argued that epistemology is quite contrary to ontology since it focuses on what is accurate or factual. There are four categories portending to the research sources. The first category is the intuition knowledge that focuses on the intuitions beliefs and faith of research participants. Consequently, human feelings are involved in a primary role in intuitive knowledge as compared to the dependence on facts.
The second category of epistemological sources of knowledge is authoritarian knowledge, and it focuses on the information that has been obtained from books papers of research experts and the supreme authorities. These portend the secondary sources of information. The third source is logical knowledge, and it heralds a creation of new knowledge via the use of reasoning seemed to be logical. Furthermore, the fourth category is empirical knowledge, and this one depends on the empirical facts that have been created and thus can be demonstrated.
Nonetheless, I think that research can incorporate all these epistemological sources of knowledge within one study. For instance, the intuitive knowledge may be applied to choose a particular research problem to be explored within a selected research area. Furthermore, the authoritative source of knowledge on research argues that knowledge is gotten during the process of reviewing the literature. Besides, relevant knowledge is gained as an outcome of the analysis of primary data findings; the conclusions of the research can, therefore, be viewed as empirical knowledge.
Then there is axiology, and it portends a branch of philosophy that focuses on a judgement about value. Axiology is explicitly involved with the evaluation of the role of researchers’ value on every aspect if the process of research. Consequently, we should know that axiology portends to the aims and objectives of the study to be conducted. Thus axiology also strives to make intelligibility in case the researcher is aiming to make explanation, comprehension, or prediction of the world.
Therefore as brought out by research philosophy, axiology focuses on the participant’s value in the research process. This is deemed to be primary as a researcher’s value has an influence on how he/ she carry out the research and what the researcher values in the findings of the study.
References
Blaikie, N., and Priest, J., 2019. Designing social research: The logic of anticipation. John Wiley & Sons.
Bryman, A., 2012. Social research methods: OUP Oxford.
Dudovskiy, J., 2016. The ultimate guide to writing a dissertation in business studies: A step-by-step assistance. Pittsburgh, USA.
Hallebone, E., and Priest, J., 2009. Chapter 4: Philosophies of Science: The bedrock of good research. Business and Management Research: Paradigms and Practices, pp.45-70.
Lee, N., and Lings, I., 2008. Doing business research: a guide to theory and practice. Sage.
Lindgren, M., and Packendorff, J., 2009. Social constructionism and entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A., 2012. Research methods for business students (6. utg.). Harlow: Pearson.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A., 2009. Understanding research philosophies and approaches. Research methods for business students, 4(106-135).