I.1. Ontological/Epistemological Priors

Forum rules

We encourage contributors to the Discussion Board to publicly identify by registering and logging in prior to posting. However, if you prefer, you may post anonymously (i.e. without having your post be attributed to you) by posting without logging in. Anonymous posts will display only after a delay to allow for administrator review. Contributors agree to the QTD Terms of Use.

To participate, you may either post a contribution to an existing discussion by selecting the thread for that topic (and then click on "Post Reply") or start a new thread by clicking on "New Topic" below.

For instructions on how to follow a discussion thread by email, click here.

Marcus Kreuzer
Villanova University
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 9:48 am

Topic 1: Competing Epistemological Assumptions

PostWed Sep 07, 2016 9:18 pm

Political science is multi-faceted and multi-sited field of inquiry. Diverse epistemological assumptions inform research excellence and subfield-specific practices with profound effects on the construction of the objects of research. This online discussion might help explicate the manifold epistemic and ontological presuppositions that inform research design, concept formation, construction of evidence, and strategies of argumentation within the discipline.

[1] Beyond visual metaphors of transparency that seem to imply correspondence notions of truth, theoretical fit or data uniformity, what other evaluative criteria in research practices are used within political science?

[2] What epistemic frames inform, tacitly or explicitly, various qualitative and interpretive methods?

[3] How can alternative epistemic frames expand and enhance conceptualizations of the political, and in so doing contribute to the discipline?

If you are responding to a specific question, please reference it as Question 1, 2 or 3. This will help structure the discussion a bit more. Thanks.

Post Reply