Methodology: Human Sciences
How does the fact that the object of our inquiry is human effect the way we pursue it? How does it impact the ethical limitations imposed on it?
The human sciences object of our inquiry is human introducting bias and subjectivity. Confirmation bias can occur as the need for confirmation of our own hypotheses, relating to pride, can influence how we pursue investigations in order recieve confirmation on our beliefs. Participant bias as a result of the ethical consideration of deception can introduce inaccurate responses according to what the participant believes the researcher wants to observe which can impact ethical limitations as human scientists would want to avoid participant bias which then can't coexist with ethical considerations. Humans are unpredictable and don't make rational choices so the amount of variables to control is limitless. Hasty generalizations affect ethical limitations because it assumes that one factor affects a population of people in order to justify a conclusion and pursue it further.
Are all the human sciences about the mutual interaction between observation and theory?
In the human sciences of Psychology, there is a foundation in observational studies and quantitative data however studies like Maguire et al and numerous others use MRI scans and brain-imaging technologies in order to produce results by the methodology in biology. The monitoring of hormone levels and specific biological reactions to stimuli is far from observation based, but mirrors the natural science strict methodology. However, every human being is also different in the way their body reacts to situations and their effect by the environment. Economics is theoretically understood and pursued but lacks experimental sciences and solely uses theories to apply to the real world.
What assumptions about human nature, if any, do we need to make in order to justify our methods?
In the human sciences of Economics, the assumption that human beings act rationally justifies their methods in predicting behavior.
The human sciences object of our inquiry is human introducting bias and subjectivity. Confirmation bias can occur as the need for confirmation of our own hypotheses, relating to pride, can influence how we pursue investigations in order recieve confirmation on our beliefs. Participant bias as a result of the ethical consideration of deception can introduce inaccurate responses according to what the participant believes the researcher wants to observe which can impact ethical limitations as human scientists would want to avoid participant bias which then can't coexist with ethical considerations. Humans are unpredictable and don't make rational choices so the amount of variables to control is limitless. Hasty generalizations affect ethical limitations because it assumes that one factor affects a population of people in order to justify a conclusion and pursue it further.
Are all the human sciences about the mutual interaction between observation and theory?
In the human sciences of Psychology, there is a foundation in observational studies and quantitative data however studies like Maguire et al and numerous others use MRI scans and brain-imaging technologies in order to produce results by the methodology in biology. The monitoring of hormone levels and specific biological reactions to stimuli is far from observation based, but mirrors the natural science strict methodology. However, every human being is also different in the way their body reacts to situations and their effect by the environment. Economics is theoretically understood and pursued but lacks experimental sciences and solely uses theories to apply to the real world.
What assumptions about human nature, if any, do we need to make in order to justify our methods?
In the human sciences of Economics, the assumption that human beings act rationally justifies their methods in predicting behavior.
Comments
Post a Comment