The Pros And Cons Of Epistemology

This author ascribes to the empiricism paradigm. This paradigm is similar to empirical knowing in that it is based on the premise that what is known can be verified through the senses, or

Epistemology is generally the study of knowledge and knowing (Braten, 2010). Although, personal epistemology refers to the belief about one’s knowledge and the process of knowing (Braten, 2010). To help develop the personal epistemology belief, questions will be addressed with supportive sources to give a better understanding of knowledge and learning.

To simplify this assertion, it is best to define epistemology as a series of (occasionally conflicting) views about "the most appropriate" (Easterby-Smith et al, 2012) method of inquiring about the source of knowledge in the world. The pivotal element of this definition is the fact that there are a multitude of epistemological perspectives, and some are more appropriate for certain management research problems than for others. Thus, epistemology is one of the primary ways in which researchers can specifically tailor the pursuit of their research question, which is a crucial part of the research process (Podsakoff and Dalton,

Ontological perspective – Pragmatists have a variety of viewpoints regarding social realities, and they focus on what works (Creamer, 2018; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).

Rationalism can be defined as a theory that opinions and actions should be based on reason and knowledge rather than on religious beliefs or emotional response (Wikepedia). Rationalism is most commonly associated with empiricism, base life on experience, because of their completely different views on how to approach decisions, opinions, and actions. Rationalism has also been described as holding reason as the chief source of knowledge and reality has a logical structure (Blanshard, Brand. “Rationalism”.). Rationalists believe that truth and intellect are directly related and that rational principles lie in metaphysics,

Interpretivism beliefs that the world is socially constructed and subjective, that the observer is part of the what is observed and that science is driven by human interest. Furthermore, interpretivism, like action research, tries to understand what actually is happening by looking at the totality of each situation.

What is reality really like? A current running through much of the philosophical thinking around the time of Socrates and Plato was that there is a difference between how the world appears and how it is. Our senses reveal one layer of reality but it is our minds that penetrate deeper. The world of appearances is a world in flux but underneath there must be a stable reality. For there is much that is unchanging. We recognise kinds of things – badgers, daffodils, mountains – and whilst members of these kinds are born, change and die, and differ from one another in ever so many ways, the kind-defining essence doesn't change. We see here the key rationalist idea that knowledge is a priori

During the 1970’s there was a surge in debate and practice of employee share ownership schemes. While the benefits have been highlighted throughout various literatures since then, there has is still a continued interest in the topic to date. As seen through the literature, ESOP’s can be implemented in almost any company in any sector. There are various opinions on what exactly the benefits of ESOP’s are, while some feel they reduce the risk of trade dispute between unions and companies others think their benefit is quite futile.

In contrast to Idealists, Pragmatists believes that there are no unchanging or eternal truths. Pragmatists reject

Reality becomes a social construction. 3.Methodology. The methodology ofinterpretivism can best be described as hermenutic or dialectic. Hermenutics is the study of how to make interpretive inquiry.

The most practical of analytical philosophy also included Moore, and Carnape. The American (neo) pragmatism philosophy is a philosophical movement that was given systematic terms by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James and later taken up and revamped by John Dewey. Pragmatists stress the practical purpose of knowledge as a way for acclimatizing to reality and controlling it. Pragmatism concur with empiricism in its emphasis on the importance of experience over a priori reasoning. However the truth had customarily been discussed in terms of communication with reality or in terms of coherence pragmatism embraces that truth is to be sought in the process of verification. Pragmatists translates ideas as means and plans of action rather than as images of reality; more specifically, they are recommendations and anticipations of possible conduct, hypotheses or forecasts of what will result from a given action, or ways of organizing behavior(Answer,2010)

Epistemology concentrates the way of information, the reasonability of conviction, and support. A great part of the verbal confrontation in epistemology fixates on four regions: the philosophical examination of the way of learning and how it identifies with so much ideas as truth, conviction, and justification, different issues of distrust, the sources and extent of information and defended conviction, and the criteria for information and defense.

Fred Dretske (2005) rejects the claim that closure holds over known entailment. Dretske argues that propositions, P, have heavyweight implications, Q, which cannot be known by the same reasons that P is known by; and that if Closure holds this leads to scepticism. However, Dretske argues that we can rule out closure by acknowledging that relevant alternatives for P are distinct and separate from those for Q. Thus closure fails and scepticism is avoided. Intuitively I find myself agreeing with Dretske, but think that this intuition itself is part of the larger problem within epistemology. Using ideas from Nagel et al, I contend that the analytic approach to the problems of closure and knowledge itself is potentially limited; that gaps between thought modes can explain cases of apparent loss of knowledge as exposed by Dretske. Moreover, that if we want to further success regarding problems within epistemology a new approach may be needed. I suggest we look toward the rational sciences, and towards a form of experimental epistemology.

These thoughts parallel to the ideas of constructivism where experiences and knowledge correlate (Hein, 1991).

A paradigm can be defined as ‘a basic set of beliefs that guides action’ (Guba, 1990). The positivist paradigm can be defined as ‘an epistemological position that