Difference Between The Objective And Interpretive Theories

The idea about human to reconcile the uncertainties of the past with a new or present situation. Throughout the year I studied the texts about, novel 1984 by George Orwell, a film Good Will Hunting and Shakespeare's play Hamlet. In these texts because the characters' uncertainty about the past, they won’t succeed in future situations in their lives. I'm referring from the text of how these uncertainties can have an effect for these protagonists throughout the story until they reach tougher situations.

There are several different types of theoretical orientations that a student may choose to identify him or herself with. Although students may choose a specific theoretical orientation they may change their orientation later on in their academic career depending on their perspective of the field. Each orientation is equal, neither orientation is better than the other. Just because a person picks a certain orientation doesn’t mean that their psychological assessment will be any longer or shorter. Its important that a student identifies what they what orientation they want to identify with because they should spend their time as a student becoming an expert in that orientation, because when they graduate they are considered experts and is expected to have a certain level of competency. As of right now I mostly identify with eclectic. I see that there is so much value in each orientation, but for the purpose of this paper I am going to choose cognitive behavioral therapy. The reason that I mostly identify with CBT is because I currently use it now and I’m very familiar with it. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) refers to a class of interventions that share the basic premise that mental disorders and psychological distress are maintained by cognitive factors (Hofmann, Asnaani, Vonk, Sawyer, & Fang, 2012).

Utilizing the five senses in order to know something about oneself, the world one lives in, and others usually works, but our senses sometimes deceive us. For example, when light is refracted in a certain way, our brain leads us to believe that the thing such as a pencil is bent. Once we take the object out of the water, however, we can clearly see that it was not bent. Additionally, one can never be absolutely certain that what one knows about others is true. For example, one might think that they know the favorite color of another individual to be blue, but be wrong as the other individuals favorite color is actually green. Even though one cannot always know with certainty if one know things to be so, one can always know some things to be

This theory states that individuals tend to believe certain things or think a certain way because their point of view has

When a state of probability remains undetermined, we often feel compelled to define it. We desire certainty, so we obtain it through whichever way we see fit, even when it is unattainable or harmful to do so. When we imagine

The Uncertainty Reduction Theory states that before and during initial interactions between two people, one's first instinct is to reduce uncertainty about the other through various methods. For example, when you see someone you think you would like to know, you try and figure out what they are like through various methods so you can control the conversation and steer it into a path that the other person finds interesting.

Theory simply tells the essential truth about the real world through evidence obtained by scientific method. Barker defines theory as a group of related hypotheses, concepts, and constructs, based on facts and observations all in which attempt to explain a phenomenon. Every theory is unique, but can reflect some of the same general ideas. Though every theory has a different focus, they can all be intertwined in order to enhance therapeutic alliance. In order to choose the best theoretical orientation for ourselves and how they will benefit our practice, we first have to understand the meaning of theoretical orientation.

Uncertainty reduction theory is “the point of view that uncertainty motivates communication and that certainty reduces the motivation to communicate” (Wood, definition). This theory was first developed by Charles Berger. He believed that when people are to meet for the first time they have a high level of uncertainty and the only way for them to reduce it is to communicate with one another. “They don’t know what each other likes, thinks and believes; how each other responds to certain reactions, and they’re unsure what each other expects or wants from interacting” (Wood,184). There are three prior conditions that are meant to help individuals want to reduce uncertainty.

This is the assumption underlying all our ideas of causality. If the future does not resemble the past, then all our reason based on cause and effect will crumble. When Hume proposed questions such as “Is there any more intelligible proposition then to affirm that all trees will flourish in December and January, and will decay in May and June?” (49), Hume demonstrates that it is not a relation of ideas that future will resemble the past; it is possible that the course of nature will change. Therefore, what happens in the future is neither a relation of ideas, nor a matter of fact. “It is impossible, therefore, that any arguments from experience can prove this resemblance of past to future, since all these arguments are founded on the supposition of that resemblance.”(51)

Furthermore, there are three main aspects which were customarily associated with a science: metaphysical, theoretical and methodological assumptions. Under metaphysical it is believed that to gain scientific status requires the certainty that the subject matter i.e. human thought/ behaviour, is similar to that of other accepted sciences. This could then be true for Psychology, as particularly since Darwin’s suggestion of a continuity between behaviours of humans and other species, behaviour has become more scrutinised. However, this must be assumed in respect of determinism, suggesting predictions could be made. ‘Heisenbergs uncertainty principle’ suggests that when relating evidence of indeterminism within the universe to human behaviour, it proves ambiguous, and with parts of the discipline believing strongly in free will it seems difficult to establish a common ground (Valentine E.R. page 2).

There are two different types of orientations that a theory can be, objective, which uses quantitative data and believes in singular truths, and there is interpretive, which uses qualitative data and believes in multiple meanings and truths. Different types of studies can fall under each of the two approaches, and will be seen further into the course as specific studies and theories are mentioned and examined. Some studies could be concluded as

My worldview thus is a set of fundamental of my beliefs through which I view the world and my calling and future in it. The premonition may be so manifested that it goes largely unquestioned; it may be greatly refined through cultural-historical development; it may not be straightforward and developed into a systematic creation of life, or it may not even be deepened into a philosophy. Nonetheless, this perspective is a passage for the subsequent belief which gives orientation and meaning to life. It is the unifying and revelatory framework by which order evaluated, the standard by which reality is managed and followed. It is the set of hinges on which all our everyday thinking and doing turns. Although a worldview is held only by

The theory itself doesn’t have to specify the means of achieving a stated objective; however, it has to provide a sound basis for explaining, defining and predicting behaviour. The application of the theory can have many elements and it is in the interpretation of what will induce the predicted effects in the economy predicted by the theory which will result in predicted or other stated outcomes.

Theory explains how individual act toward things on the basis of the meanings they ascribe to those things. The meaning comes

It is logical to say that things happen for a reason. A ball, kicked by a child in a playground, flies through the air and eventually comes down to the ground. The child has kicked the ball enough times to expect that once the ball reaches its highest point, it will fall. Through experience of kicking the ball and it coming back to the ground, the child will develop expectations of this action. This thought process seems sound, yet a question of certainty arises. Can we be certain that future events will be like past events? Can we be certain that the ball will fall once it has been kicked? This concept was one of David Hume’s most famous philosophical arguments: the Problem of Induction. This paper will outline Hume’s standpoint, as well give criticism for his argument.