Research Metho.

1. Discuss the relationship between myth, philosophy and science?

            Humans are the part of large and complex cosmic tradition going back to about 13.7 billion years, when the Big Bang gave rise to the known universe of today! About 4.5 billion years ago the solar system was formed. Further, 4.5 million years ago humans (Homo sapiens) evolved. About 20,000 years ago Neanderthals would sit around the fire at night watching starry sky and listening to the sounds from far. They were trying to understand the world around them. They were trying to make sense of life, but more importantly, of death. How did dead people show up in their sleep, in their dreams? What could be made of their own impending deaths? In order to honor the dead person, Neanderthals buried their dead with flowers and beads.

At first primitive humans thought very little about anything but immediate things. They were preoccupied thinking such things as: “Here is a bear; what shall I do?” Or “There is a squirrel; how can I get it?” Until language had developed to some extent there could have been little thinking beyond the range of actual experience, for language is the instrument of thought as bookkeeping is the instrument of business. It records and fixes and enables thought to get on to more and more complex ideas.  Primordial man, before he could talk, probably saw very vividly, mimicked very cleverly, gestured, laughed, danced, and lived, without much speculation about whence he came or why he lived. He feared the dark, no doubt, and thunderstorms and big animals and queer things and whatever he dreamt about, and no doubt he did things to propitiate what he feared or to change his luck and please the imaginary powers in rock and beast and river.

In these questions of primitive thought, we must remember that the so called “lowly and savage” peoples of today probably throw very little light on the mental state of men before the days of fully developed language. Primordial man could have had little or no tradition before the development of speech. All  primitive peoples of today, on the contrary, are soaked in tradition - the tradition of thousands of generations. They may have weapons like their remote ancestors and methods like them, but what were slight and shallow impressions on the minds of their predecessors are now deep and intricate grooves worn throughout the intervening centuries generation by generation.

The word “mythos” is related to the Greek meaning “to be spoken with the mouth”. All myths are fundamentally, if not historically, true and lead to the highest of truths. The myths and their many facets have given birth to religion, mysticism, spirituality, philosophy or in short, to the different articulations of human quest for meaning. Myth is humankind’s basic method of communicating our meaning of the cosmos and answering the why and how regarding birth, life, death of humans and the rhythms of nature. Mythology lives and breathes in us. In other words, we live and breathe our myths. Myth constitutes our very existence. We have been imprinted with certain fears and faiths that have dwelt in our collective unconscious for thousands of years.

2. Write a detailed essay on the empirical method.

The empirical method held that all essential truths about the world were discoverable only by empirical experience i.e. sense experience. It is a process of arriving at truth through experiential verification of perceived data. Hence in this method reason was substituted by experience.  The unit exposes the empirical method adopted by these three above mentioned philosophers.

Earlier concepts of the existence of "innate ideas" were the subject of debate between the Continental rationalists and the British empiricists in the 17th century through the late 18th century. John Locke, George Berkeley and David Hume were the primary exponents of empirical method. 

Empirical method is generally taken to mean ‘the collection of data’ on which to base a theory or derive a conclusion in science. The term "empirical" was originally used to refer to certain ancient Greek practitioners of medicine who rejected adherence to the dogmatic doctrines of the day, preferring instead to rely on the observation of phenomena as perceived in experience. An empiric is "one who, either in medicine or in other branches of science, relies solely upon observation and experiment.  The empirical method is not sharply defined and is often contrasted with   the experimental method, where data are derived from the systematic manipulation of variables in an experiment. Some of the difficulty in discussing the empirical method is from the ambiguity of the meaning of its linguist root: empiric. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (2nd Edition, 1989), empiric is derived from the ancient Greek for experience, έμπειρία, which is ultimately derived from έυ (in )+ πεἳρα (trial) or experiment. Therefore, empirical data is information that is derived from the trials and errors of experience. In this way, the empirical method is similar to the experimental method. However, an essential difference is that in an experiment the different "trials" are strictly manipulated so that an inference can be made as to causation of the observed change that results. This contrasts with the empirical method of aggregating naturally occurring data. In philosophy too an empirical method refers to a practice of knowledge derived entirely from sense perception or experience. It is a process of attaining truth through experiential verification of perceived data. It is a method which interprets philosophy from a world of experience. But in order to understand the entire process of empirical method one needs to study what first Empiricism is and philosophers who have contributed to this philosophical trend.

Empirical method paved way of very practical basis for philosophy. It said pure rationality or making use of reason as the only tool of knowledge will led philosophy to a baseless ground. Therefore, one needs to start from the given form the sense perception or experience. Out mind cannot act, reason cannot perform its function unless something is carried on to it in and through the sense experiences. Truth or discovery of truth is basically through the a posteriori. Though the empirical method has its own drawbacks still it served a valid basis for demonstration of truth.

3. c) Briefly explain Descartes’ rational method.

Fundamental aim of Descartes was to attain philosophical truths by the use of reason. But what he was seeking was not to discover a multiplicity of isolated truths but to develop a system of true prepositions in which nothing would be presupposed which was not self-evident and indubitable. And the whole edifice should rest on a sure foundation. In one sense Descartes consciously and deliberately broke with the past and did not rely on any previous philosophy. He resolved to rely on his own reason and not on authority. He was against what is conjectural of which he accused the scholastics. Knowledge for him was only certain knowledge. He was determined to attain and work with clear and distinct ideas in contrast to confused ideas and in contrast to terms (scholastics) without any clear meaning. He built his own interconnected system of knowledge, comprising an account of knowledge, metaphysics, physics and other sciences.

This ambition is summarized in one of his last writings as “all philosophy is like a tree, metaphysics is the roots it starts with the intuitively apprehended existence of the finite self and proceeds to establish the criterion of truth, existence of God and the existence of material world. Physics is the trunk of the tree and it depends on metaphysics in the sense physics cannot be considered organic part of science until the ultimate principles of physics have been shown to follow metaphysical principles. Particle sciences which are the branches of the tree will be truly science when their organic dependence on physics or natural philosophy is shown.

d) Explain notes taking. Discuss various methods of notes taking.

In order to begin a research work we have to consult relevant sources of information. The sources of information can be primary or secondary. The primary sources provide data gathered at first hand and from which the researcher directly collects data that have not been collected previously. The secondary sources are those from which data are got at second hand, that is, sets of data that taken from other people’s original data. Whereas primary data are first hand information collected through various methods like observation, interviewing, mailing etc, secondary data are data which have collected and complied for another purpose. Primary sources include journal articles, research reports, conference papers, thesis, project reports etc. Bibliographies, reference books, reviews, directories etc form secondary sources. Various Methods of Note Taking:

The clarity in reporting a research work is influenced by the reader in view, how technical the problem is, the research’s hold over his facts and techniques, his command over language and the form and fullness of notes, i.e., of the data and documentation. For keeping accurate records we need high quality notes and this shows the importance of note-taking in research.

CARD STYLE

If we are taking notes on cards we should record each piece of information from a source in a separate card. For each source the completer bibliographical information has to be recorded in one card, which will be our bibliographical card.

NOTE BOOK STYLE

In this method, we should record all information on a single page or a series of pages in the note book. We should write all the bibliographical details including the author, title, place of publication, publisher and year of publication at the top of the page of each source. Notes should be recorded in the middle of the page leaving wide margins.

4. a) Explain the importance of philosophical methods.

Philosophy plays a tremendous integrating role in scientific knowledge. The touchstone of the value of philosophy as a world-view and methodology is the degree to which it is interconnected with life. This interconnection may be both direct and indirect, through the whole system of culture, through science, art, morality, religion, law, and politics. As a special form of social consciousness, constantly interacting with all its other forms, philosophy is their general theoretical substantiation and interpretation. In ancient times, as we have seen, nearly every notable scientist was at the same time a philosopher and every philosopher was to some extent a scientist. Which means both scientists and philosophers have used both the methods in their journey towards finding the truth. The connection between science and philosophy has endured for thousands of years. Science and philosophy have always learned from each other. Philosophy tirelessly draws from scientific discoveries fresh strength, material for broad generalisations, while to the sciences it imparts the world-view and methodological impulses of its universal principles. Many general guiding ideas that lie at the foundation of modern science were first enunciated by the perceptive force of philosophical thought.

This trend towards self-knowledge, of which much is said both by scientists and philosophers, is bound to show itself and should show itself in the relationship between philosophical methods and scientific methods. At this juncture I would say philosophical methods and the scientific methods are two sides of a same coin. They both complement each other and enhance our day-to-day life situation. By this time we must have a panoramic view of philosophical methods and scientific methods and its relation and how they help us in our present life.

c) Mark the relation between Thesis, Anti-Thesis and Synthesis.

Thesis, Anti-Thesis and Synthesis: The thesis is an intellectual proposition; Anti-thesis is a reaction to the proposition; the synthesis solves the conflict between the thesis and antithesis by reconciling their common truths, and forming a new proposition. Showing the futility of noumenal arguments such as the World has a beginning in time and is limited in space, Kant puts forth an equally forceful counter argument like - the world has no beginning and no limitations in space, it is infinite in time and space; and no argument can be proved at the end Kant called the first argument as Thesis and the second argument Anti-thesis, where the latter proves the futility of the former. He termed this mode of criticism as ‘Transcendental Dialectic’. Here Dialectic is a method of refutation.The synthesis is the determination of the first two through one another, in such a way that the ego and the non-ego mutually limit each other. Here for the first time, the dialectics got the triadic method and entered into a speculative plane. 

d) What is Language Game?

Language Game: Language game theory is expressed in the Investigations. The language game theory moves from the foundations of logic to the nature of the world.  The shift therefore is from the limited understanding of language, language of the natural sciences to the language of wider forms of life. It is no longer one view of language rather languages within the language. A sentence / proposition does presuppose a ‘language game’, but a language game will be only a small segment of the whole of language. It is the use, employment  of particular word in the given language game gives rise to meaning. The language game theory therefore, is the understanding that the language is determined by rules which are particular to the form-of-life.

 e) What is meant by the semantic autonomy of the text?

If pre-understanding shapes our understanding, the presumption of objectivity (the concern of epistemology is at stake. There is no such thing as an objective reading of a text. To get to know the mind of the author whether dead or living is naive and inessential. Hence the text as it has come of age must speak for itself. Suppose if the author makes further comments on what he originally intended in his literary work (art, poem, play, film etc.) what status does it occupy? Once the text leaves the desk of the author it is autonomous and his extra-textual comments must be on par with the views of others. On the other hand, we should not fall into the trap of what Ricoeur calls the fallacy of the absolute text. A text is not an authorless entity - it remains a discourse said by someone to someone else about something. It is impossible to cancel out this main characteristic of discourse without reducing texts to natural objects, ie, to things which are not man-made but which, like pebbles, are found in the sand. For Ricoeur, there are two extremes and both are to be avoided. One extreme is the dependence of the text on the intention of the author because primarily we can never know the mind of the author and secondly any rich text will have more than one meaning. Another extreme is doing what one wants with the text as if the text has no author at all.

                     

5. a)Triangulation

Triangulation – Triple checking of a hypothesis that aims for congruence of information  from various sources. respondent validation: Here the respondent is asked check the researcher’s hypothesis in a scale of strongly agree to strongly disagree. Peer debriefing: colleagues of the investigator or or experts can be asked to check the analysis. Hybrid or mixed method: Here we may analyze a sample of cases first qualitatively.  Then we may code information into values of variables to make inferences about a population quantitatively.



 b) Tabula Rasa

According to empiricism human mind at birth is “tabula rasa” or a clean slate. The mind is being compared to a blank writing tablet, white paper and void of all characters. It is in original state a mental blankness. The mind is only potential or inactive before receiving ideas from the senses. Sense experience as source of knowledge. Sensation and reflection the outer and the inner sense experience is the only windows through which the dark chamber of mind comes to be filled with light. Empiricism does not deal with universals. It holds that universal propositions can satisfactorily be explained by particulars. Empiricism denies intuition which enables us to grasp general truths about reality independently of experience as a result it accepts only inductive method which is a process of reasoning from a part to a whole, from particulars to generals, individuals to universals.

d) Plagiarism

The writer must acknowledge indebtedness to an author or source, not only for material quoted verbatim, but for every fact, judgment, theory, or principle taken from other sources. This applies, therefore, to paraphrase of summary as well. Common facts known to every intelligent reader need no acknowledgement. Failure to acknowledge the source is called plagiarism. It invites severe penalties since it amounts to cheating or robbing. All quotation should correspond exactly with the originals in wording, spelling and punctuation. Hence there is need for care. No matter how brief the quotation, the description of the context should usually be given in order to avoid misleading or unwarranted interpretation of the author quoted.

f)Hypothesis

 It is suggested explanation of something. A hypothesis is a logical supposition, a reasonable guess, an educated conjecture that provides a tentative explanation for the phenomenon under investigation. It can also provide information in resolving the specific problem and in the process, the main research problem. Ex. If you switch on the lamp and it does light what is your reasonable guess as to the reason why it does not light?

h) Difference

 Derrida suggests the term differance, a sort of portmanteau word combining the present participle of the verb “to differ” and “to defer”. In other words, different meanings of a text can be found by decomposing the structure of language in which it is written. In the words of Derrida, “the trace is the differance which opens appearance and signification.” He further asserts that if it belongs to the movement of signification, then “signification is a priori written, whether inscribed or not, in one form or another, in a ‘sensible’ and ‘spatial’ element that is called ‘exterior’.” It is also significant to note that Derrida considers the trace as an arche-writing not only because it is the first possibility of spoken word but also because it is the first possibility of written word.