Beyond Objective Truth: The Richer Perspective of interpretivism
As a discipline, science seeks to reveal truths about our natural world and societal phenomena through systematic experimentation and observation. Two major philosophical frameworks, interpretivism, and positivism, have appeared over the years to guide scientific inquiry. The positivist approach emphasizes the importance of objectivity and empirical evidence, utilizing systematic quantitative research methods. On the other hand, an interpretive approach highlights subjective meaning and the social construction of knowledge recognizing and considering an individual's unique perspectives, backgrounds, and social context. It involves qualitative research methods such as interviews and observations, which provides more nuanced data. Through qualitative research methods, reflexivity, and embracing the social construction of knowledge, interpretivism encourages a more holistic and inclusive understanding of human experiences and social realities, expanding the boundaries of scientific exploration.
Though quantitative research has established merits in many aspects of science and technology studies, qualitative research provides unique advantages in examining and understanding the social, cultural, and contextual aspects of science and technology. With a strong focus on numerical data and statistical analysis, quantitative methods struggle to capture subjective experiences and overlook ethical implications and contextual nuances of the STS phenomena. Qualitative approaches enable scientists and researchers to uncover diverse perspectives, explore complex phenomena in depth, and facilitate ethical and reflective considerations. By utilizing this type of approach, interpretivism acts as a valuable tool in understanding the intricacies of science and technology within society. For example, when analyzing the way in which technology affects society, interpretivism allows researchers to explore diverse perspectives involving cultural differences and values that influence an individual’s use of technology. Promoting reflexivity and ethical considerations enhances the social applicability and relevance of scientific findings while also encouraging scientists and researchers to reflect on their own values and biases as well as the potential impact of their research on their participants and society as a whole. Interpretivism pushes our understanding of complex social phenomena that are not easily quantified beyond the objective truths of science.
The interpretivist approach recognizes that knowledge is socially constructed whereas positivism firmly emphasizes objective knowledge and the accumulation of knowledge through experience. From an epistemological standpoint, interpretivism rejects the theory of a single objective truth discoverable solely by empirical observation. French sociologist and philosopher of science Bruno Latour challenged traditional understandings of science and technology. Latour uses the same phrase as philosopher Thomas Nagel, which is also the name of his book, The View From Nowhere. Though their interpreted meanings differ, a view from nowhere suggests a need for scientists to view science and the creation of their theories free from bias and influence, otherwise known as objectivity. However, there is no idealized world without friction or unpredictability, which you can always assess objectively. Latour criticized this notion, as it ignores the social and contextual factors that shape scientific knowledge. Interpretivists argue that knowledge is constructed through social interactions, shared understandings, and societal context. Recognizing the role of social factors in knowledge accumulation is how interpretivism can reveal biases and hidden power dynamics that shape scientific inquiry in society. Researchers are then able to explore how other factors such as power dynamics influence the distribution of benefits and risks associated with technology and expose social inequalities to advocate for more equitable outcomes. This encourages a critical awareness that fosters reflexivity and contextual understanding, which is often neglected in the positivist approach. If multiple interpretations and perspectives can coexist, then they can deepen our understanding of the world and support a more diverse understanding of knowledge. Scientists and researchers are also implored to challenge existing paradigms and explore alternative perspectives, providing more opportunities to enrich scientific knowledge. Subjective meaning and human experience shape our understanding of the world, as purely objective measures may not fully capture an individual’s unique perspectives.
Through recognizing the importance of subjective meaning, reflexivity, and the influence of context, interpretivism addresses the complexities of social phenomena in regard to science and technology and expands the boundaries of scientific exploration. Furthermore, interpretivism uncovers underlying assumptions, biases, and values through critical examination, acknowledging how these aspects shape scientific and technological development. Positivism fails to account for any subjective factors, focusing on objective truths in a world full of subjective experiences. Scientists and researchers can obtain a deeper understanding of the complex relationship between science, technology, and society by embracing interpretivism and examining the social, cultural, and contextual dimensions.
References (Formatting error)
Halfpenny, Peter. “The Relation Between Quantitative and Qualitative Social Research.” BMS:
Bulletin of Sociological Methodology / Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, no. 57, 1997, pp. 49–64. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24359812. Accessed 9 May 2023.
Kofman, Ava. “Bruno Latour, the Post-Truth Philosopher, Mounts a Defense of Science.” The New York Times, 25 Oct. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/magazine/bruno- latour-post-truth-philosopher-science.html.
Perelman, Tali. “In Defense of a Messier Science.” The Breakthrough Institute, 7 Feb. 2020, thebreakthrough.org/journal/no-12-winter-2020/down-to-earth#fn-13.
