OK, I'm quite prepared to be laughed off the forum or be told I'm a bit of a dunce, but here's the rub: I know what I believe, but I don't know how to categorize that belief. I think I might be a humanist but I also quite like the notion of critical realism and social constructivism sounds good too! What if I don't fully fit any philosophical standpoint?
If you don't find this post too silly for words I'd love some advice.
From the blunt end of the brick wall I've hit, many thanks Mog :$

======= Date Modified 07 Feb 2011 21:45:34 =======
Hi Mog

Don't think you'll be laughed off at all. I'm writing up at the moment so it's an area I've had to consider, and reconsider - indeed what am I?

From my perspective I don't think it's a case of completely wedging yourself into a particular camp. There are aspects of different philsophies that we all inevitably draw on but as time has gone on, and through my readings, I have decided that my PhD conceptual framework is the philosophy of classical pragmatism. My personal life stance is Humanism but I don't really declare that in my thesis. For sure there's bit of others that appeal, like you critical realism and realism, even a hint of Marxism (!!) but classical pragmatism is the best fit for me. However there are aspects of that as well that I'm not too sure of. Overall though, it's me.


I looked back on my early notes, taken over three years ago and here's what I scribbled:

You should be able to identify your overall worldview. A person's worldview is determined by their (i) Epistemology, (ii) ontology, (iii) methodology and (iv) their ideology. These four interact to shape how YOU think of the world. I can remember that terrifying first class given by a brilliant if very caustic professor. He said to us that it was not a supermarket shelf full of 'isms' and we are expected to chose one. Rather we need to know the different stances and philosophies that are out there and decide where we stand in relation to them.

A friend of mine recently passed her viva with one minor correction - the examiners asked her to state more explicitly what her epistemology and ontology were. They accepted they was there in her thesis but want them brought to the fore more. As you probably know any good research/methodology book will go through the different approaches and philosphies in the introduction. What's the saying?? "No research takes place in a philosophical vaccuum"

Theory and philosophy, often what makes a PhD a PhD and what raises it above a masters. I used to be scared stiff of it but not so much anymore. I must remember that come my viva!!

A

Great comment Ady and an interesting post Mog! I loved the way your caustic professor outlined this as well- it was really clear. I've wondered about this in relation to how I think about and construct my theory of learning and education-which actually matters in education even though teachers often don't think it does. I think on the whole at times I am a solid constructivist but like Mog-am humanist very often and then at times am absolutely (in my most cynical moments) at rock bottom a functional pragmatist...whatever it is -it needs to work...and in the long run we are all carbon! Great posts guys...

My thoughts--people tend to research in the "box" or "boxes" that are an innate reflection of many things about them as a person and how they see the world. I am not so sure that you choose a box as much as you find that there is a box that you already fit into...I was doing constructivist "stuff" long before I even discovered that there was constructivism--coming from a very positivist laden field ( law) that does not even discuss methodology and if it does it says its unneccesary...

But then I found constructivism and lo and behold! My research fit into that very well, no problems, because my own world view is very much that of constructivism. An easy fit!

Some people do straddle the fence between these different boxes--or you may also find that there are varying definitions and you could be one in one book and another in another book. Paradisms are after all no more than human constructions!!! ( well according to a constructionist anyhow :p)

For PhD work I think the main thing is to identify the place your research is located, and if it multi stranded or on the fence between a couple of paradigms, I do not see that should present a problem, as long as you have meticulosly supported how that is appropriate for your research aims and then how you did the research.