Sep 04 2010
Framing Questions-Week 2
1. In Chapter 1, the authors state that “the logic of falsification is that if something cannot be proved to be wrong, it cannot be proved to be right, either.” Also, I noticed that on Pg. 15, they state that “theories can never be proved beyond all doubt; more commonly they say that theories are either supported or challenged by investigations into them.” So, my question is then, what exactly is falsification? Is it a series of specifics and “if’s, “ands” and “buts”? And in what ways does it allow a specific theory more credibility than before it was tested as the book states? Can someone clarify this for me?!
2.In the discussion in chapter 2 about performing and measuring human behavior using typical hard-science methods and applying it to the social activities and behaviors of people the book states on Pg. 17 that “Human behavior can be complicated by the fact that people can behave in complex and abstract ways, and so many different things can cause a particular behavior”? If this is so, then how can we generalize from these situations and make an argument to support a theory? Where does one draw a line from an assumption to a theory?
3.The interpretive approach towards theory and research development often is referred in the book to be more of a “qualitative research method” due to the fact that its process is through inductive research where “data slowly resolve into concepts and specific research propositions through the investigator’s own increasing skill at understanding” (24). However, can it still produce quantitative data as well? And can the “positivist method” produce qualitative data along with quantitative data? Or are there specific guidelines?