Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:45:32 +0100 (BST)
From: McPherson S <smcph-AT-essex.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Method and Theory


On Tue, 26 May 1998, Ken wrote:

> On Tue, 26 May 1998 04:04:01 -0400  McPherson S wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 25 May 1998, Ken wrote:
> 
> >  I'm curious how you* go about treating objects like subjects 
> in the methods you use for yur research.
> 
> I try to approach things as if they weren't already determined. 
>  For instance - for the most part I'm interested in ethics and 
> morality.  I'm trying not to assume a priori that the idea of 
> morality makes sense... and then I proceed on that basis... 
> although i've never been able to figure out what my method 
> entails... I suspect it has something to do with my 
> presuppostion that freedom and happiness are desirable and 
> possible... and that education and enlightenment is somehow 
> connected to this...
> 

You say that you believe that freedom and happiness are possible. I think 
we all seek it, desire it, but I don't know if anybody ever finds it.  I 
don't think so.  I was just looking at a book reviewby Terry Eagleton, on 
Death, Desire and Loss in Western Culture by Jonathan Dollimore, 1998. 
(London Review of Books, April 16, 98). Maybe you'd find it interesting 
(even the review, without getting to the book), since you are interestd in 
religion, morality and ethics, and therefore, the self, sex, and death. 
(I hope I'm not making assumptions here).

> > The method - interviwing - is not just a method, but may 
> involve (in life  story methodology) an entire approach to the 
> research - including theory.
> 
> Like hermeneutics?  Which takes the form of practical 
> reasoning AND a philosophical theory?

Yes, hermeneutics, but I don't know whether it's practical* reasoning.  
Reasoning, yes, but perhaps more of a reflective type.  I don't know.  And 
life experience has a significant part in it - in the approach.  eg Who can 
be a knower? - who has the right to produce/create knowledge?

Sue

> 
> ken
> 
> 
>