There are perspectives of perspectives of perspectives. We draw the
objective line from subjective when it is deemed convenient, common and
when it satisfies the goal. So the goal drives the research. So we
would always find what we seek in research. You see what you want to
see.
"Correlation is not equal to causation". This was
something I was playing with in my mind for sometime. In fact if
causation is not known, then correlation cannot prove anything. Then
correlation is simply an appearance, taken further we can talk about
probability. But probability is different from certainty. Probability
implies appearance and is actually a truer way of looking at things than
certainty. When we prove a rule we collect a sample of data for a
sample of time and use a particular method. Now there is infinite data,
infinite time and infinite methods or qualitative aspects. Which one do
we choose to make rules, theorems, laws etc.? It is decided upon based
on human goals and conveniences. So the first cause of everything is
still unknown, so nothing can be said to be true about anything. This is
what the mystics saw, and called all of reality an appearance instead
of a solid reality.
In a way, quantitative research is a subset of qualitative
research. Because what we call quantitative is basically a set of
qualities taken to be true and the edifice of quant stands on top of
those chosen set of qualities - concept of measurability, divisibility,
independent essence etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment