THE LOGIC OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH AND ITS METHODS OF PROCEDURES
Carregando...
Data
Autores
Orientador
Coorientador
Pós-graduação
Curso de graduação
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Tipo
Artigo
Direito de acesso
Resumo
This article presents ways in which the logic of research is understood, whatever it may be. It is understood that logic is in the core of the research, focused on the civilization of the Western World. In order to clarify this assertion it is presented a texture between the logic already mentioned in the works of the Pre-Socratic philosophers when it appears in a diffuse way; the logic, understood as a pure principle, by Plato, which brings a new way of conceiving it; the paradigm shift in the logic of investigation with Euclid, which also brings a new one; and the new, in the research instituted by Galileo. It is raised whether a controversy between quantitative versus qualitative research should be maintained. It is explained that, from the point of view of the movement of knowledge itself, this controversy does not fit and can not be maintainned. It is argued that this dichotomy is maintained in political-ideological terms, aiming at power. The views of the world, knowledge and rigor implicit in qualitative research are explained, and the underlying logic is exposed. This is a logic that goes hand in hand with the interpretation of the data constructed by the person – and his team – who investigate the questioned, which are expressed in texts through language. It is explained that interpretation requires hard work, which cannot be based on an aprioristic and general model; that it is far from being subjective and based on emotions that support opinions. The interpretation is always an intersubjective work that advances in the logical-rational dialogue between the researcher-text-context-studies that speak of the investigated person.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Logic, Qualitative research, Quantitative research, Research
Idioma
Português
Citação
Revista Pesquisa Qualitativa, v. 9, n. 22, p. 540-552, 2021.
