I gave a Honours lecture today on qualitative methods and we talked about epistomology and how to approach your own paradigm...should you be married to it or can we afford to respect all of them, both quant, qual, post-structuralist, contructivist and logical positivist....
My view is one of a pragmatist....no research method really captures the "truth" of psychological experience...who says their version is the truth..just because you have power in a study does that mean its "the truth"? what about the assumption of logical positivism? Isn't this a bias? I know these issues are pretty basic for many but I do think that a para-modern view isn't all that common...
paramodern - A term introduced by Glenn Larner (2002). It means to identify the position in which the author speaks but holds his position lightly, knowing that it can be deconstructed.
We can afford, i believe, to be generous from our own preferred
position towards the "other"..qual researchers sometimes need the
scepticism and rigourous backbone of empiricists and quant
researchers need the humanism and interest in meaning of
qualitative researchers..just like marriage the art of respectful
relationships is appreciating difference
Ultimately even this statement is ridiculous, given it still polarises
and also given that we each have intelligence to use both methods
depending on our questions..
Check this paper out ( Firestone, W. (1987). Meaning in method:
The rhetoric of quantitative and qualitative
research. Educational Researcher)
The key is to chose the right method for the right question (see
here: great paper