Science, Discourse Analysis, Reflective practice

4. Beyond Empirical Observations: The Discursive Turn

Popper’s empiricist framework of science theory apparently did not allow him to consider--and take seriously--sources of critique other than those of experimental science. I am thinking, for example, of various forms of criticism drawn from the humanities (e.g., hermeneutic reflection, language analysis), from practical philosophy (e.g., ethical reflection,discourse analysis), and from open discourse among researchers and concerned citizens in a functioning civil society (e.g., democratically organized consultation procedures, participatory models of research). I may also be allowed to mention my own specific concept of criticism drawn from critical systems thinking and critical pragmatism, i.e., boundary critique, a form of critical discourse that examines the way in which the meaning and reach of validity claims in applied science and expertise depend on the context that is taken to be relevant (Ulrich, 1983, 2000, 2001, 2006). Considering the vital part that research plays today in problem solving and decision making everywhere, such an opening up of our universe of criticaldiscourse appears vital. A well understood critical approach to research can no longer a priorilimit itself to any specific source or method of criticism; for what ultimately matters is not where a critical challenge comes from but only what arguments support or question it. Such arguments can only be identified and examined in an open discourse that is accessible to everyone concerned and to all forms of cogent argumentation.

Its notion of research competence will be very different indeed from that of critical rationalism. In particular, it will understand research competence in terms of these three indispensable qualities: reflective competence is

1. self-critical: the effort of systematically examining one’s own premises through self-reflection and dialogue, with a view to carefully qualifying the meaning and validity of one’s claims;
2. emancipatory: working actively to help others in emancipating themselves from one’s claims, as well as from theirs; and
3. ethically alert: making transparent to oneself and to others the value implications of one’s claims, and limiting these claims accordingly.

Rethinking Critically Reflective Research Practice: Beyond Popper’s Critical Rationalism

Keywords: critical rationalism; science theory; empirical foundationalism; primacy of theory; methodology choice; reflective practice

Werner Ulrich

Journal of Research Practice, Volume 2, Issue 2, 2006