JUSTIFYING ISD KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS

1
JUSTIFYING ISD KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS

• Mike Metcalfe

2

• What Is The Future OF
• ISD Knowledge?

• Jewish Physics
• Feminist Algebra
• New Age Physics
• Marxist Biology
• Spiritual Knowledge
• All is text

Knowledge
Not Knowledge
3
Knowledge?

• Objective/scientific
• Interpretive/Hermeneutic
• Critical

4
Problems?

• Interpretations
• Can be wrong? (inc. unethical)
• Need to be generalisable.
• Need to offer novel insights
• Need to be empirically falsifiable.
• Need to suggest improvements to the human
  condition?
• Need to be justified by rational argument to 1) a
  knowledgeable or 2)universal audience.
• Need appreciate they are one of many possible
  interpretations.

5
Critical ThinkingA Poem by Ron Hornsby

• An Empirical search is the start of this process
• With causal connections the scientists aim
• Controlling raw natures his route to real
  progress,
• (With always some prospect of Nobel Prize fame).
• When discoveries are made, Hermeneutics takes
  over,
• With true understanding becoming the goal,
• Relating the old and the new to each other,
• And broadcasting findings without rigmarole.
• A full understanding needs collaboration.
• When millions of people are given their say
• Confusions dispelled by combined cerebration
• So publish discoveries, dont hide them away.
• The third and last aspect is Emancipation
• Whose influence is strong even when its not
  seen.
• It makes us aware of the worlds deprivation

6
Re Use Of Rational Argument as Justification
For Interpretations
Have To Assume Rational Justification Is Real

• Rationality is reasonable
• And
• Rationality is real
• (Hegel)

7
C.West Churchman

• Suggests need for all of his Five Inquiry
  Systems to justify interpretations (and social
  action)
• Logic (inc.mathematics)
• Empirics (inc.experience)
• Empirics and Logic
• Alternative Arguments
• Seeking New Perspectives

8
Logic and Mathematics

• Evidence from Reasoning
• No use of human senses in the head
• To argue with oneself
• Convincing rational repeatable steps
• Weakness Needs leaps of faith and language
  (definitions)

9
Empirics

• Evidence Through the human senses
• Experience ?
• Objective, no discussion process
• Convincing rational repeatable observation
• See for yourself
• Weakness no explanation (why), the eye is
  easily deceived (movies) and what of non
  repeatable situations?

10
Empirics and Logic

• Evidence as theory driven observation
• Justify interpretations of 1) a stick bending in
  water, 2) terrorism.
• Dialectic between observation and thinking
• Convincing argument using repeatable evidence
• Weakness perhaps one worldview, explanation
  alone is insufficient.

11
Alternative Arguments

• Not X is (is not) the explanation
• But X explains better than Y
• Arguing across paradigms (Kuhn)
• Supporting Evidence empirics and logic
  dialectic where possible
• One interpretation accepted through a process of
  convincing rational argumentation.

12
Seeking Multiple Perspectives

• An interpretation is appreciated as one of many
  possible perspectives.
• Social action based on the interpretation is
  justified through all stakeholders a voice.
• Sweeping in worldviews
• Emancipation, Solving Complex Systems, critical
  Social Thinking
• Presenters of alternative interpretations have to
  justify their interpretation through rational
  argument.

13
Justifying A Perspective

• Convincing as
• Repeatable evidence (logic, empirics)
• Aligned with experience (Galileo problem)
• Analogous
• Interpretation/perspective needs to be
• Insightful, novel, emancipating, empirically
  falsifiable
• Note assumption of Communal Knowledge

14
Conclusion

• Interpretative Research requires
• A justified knowledge claim
• Appreciation it could be wrong? (inc. unethical)
• Explanation of how it is generalisable.
• Explanation of how it offers novel insight
• Explanations of how it might be empirically
  falsified.
• Explanation of how it leads to improvements to
  the human condition?
• Appreciation it is one of many possible
  interpretations.
• Being internally consistent, ie its research
  techniques sought alternative interpretations
  (eclectic evidence).