Brendan Spencer

September 13, 2017

The Nuts and Bolts of Research Brendan Spencer

Having always been a more logically and scientifically-minded person, the positionality

of ones research in regards to the personal biases or definitions of knowledge had never been

something that stuck out to me. Research, whether scientific or community-based, always

seemed relatively straightforward as people with varying ideas on the best solution or theory will

eventually work toward the same common goal or conclusion if they are within the same field.

The idea that ones perspectives on the actuality of reality, knowledge and processes and whether

they are independent of human interference seems almost rather confounded to me, but perhaps

that is from having developed my own thought processes and ideas on research in an

environment where truth and knowledge were always definite.

To speak further on my elected paradigm of research I should reference the location of

my ontology, epistemology and methodology. Ontologically, I believe that reality is definite and

constant, ruled by nature perhaps, but I do see how the presence of research gives off implicit

bias, but only within the perception of the reality being examined, not the reality itself; this

leaves me somewhere between realist and critical realist. Similarly, epistemologically I believe

that knowledge or truth is entirely independent of human interaction; being that the knowledge

we obtain is based on things already present around us within the laws governed by nature, or

rather by God. These things are absolute and make human interpretation or subjection irrelevant,

though opinionated. For example, we know scientifically that the world is of a spherical, more

elliptical shape; but consider that someone is firmly convinced that the world is actually flat.

That is their interpretation of reality and truth, but the fact that they believe it doesnt in any

sense make it true. In the same way, it is my belief that truth and knowledge are absolute as laid
 Brendan Spencer
September 13, 2017

out by God from the beginning, and that people are free to abide in or disregard these truths, but

their interactions with them have no bearing on the impacts of them. At the trial for Jesus

crucifixion, Pontius Pilate, being in a stalemate as whether to believe the claims of the Jews or

Jesus, asks Jesus whether He truly is a king, to which He replies For the purpose I have come

into the worldto bear witness to the truth. What is truth, Pilate responds still in agony over

the decision of this mans life. (John 18:37) Earlier Jesus is quoted as saying, I am the way,

truth and life, (John 14:6) undoubtedly providing an answer to the question.

Since my faith is the guiding paradigm to my life, I choose to hold a more biblical

epistemology. As such, whether in life or in research, my views on reality and truth/knowledge

remain constant. My methodology, however, I would say is subject to wavering depending on

the situation. From the faith-based previous descriptions, if I were facing an issue in daily life I

would take a more ideological strategic approach, allowing for interpretations from the

viewpoint of a spiritual connection (ideological only in the sense that faith goes beyond basic

knowledge); but in any other aspect, like research, I would prefer a more concrete scientific or

quantitative approach, where facts are facts.

Because I am a relatively conservative and consistent person, my mental approach to

research is very close to my approach to life problems, such that I believe the paradigm flows

across both disciplines. Because I am a mechanical engineering student, I prefer to think in more

straightforward and factual manners, which some might say would conflict with the religious

paradigm I hold dear. On the contrary, my paradigm of faith is not one of emotions and personal

ideology, but of a definitive reality and objective reasoning through God who is constant and

omnipotent, such that there is little contrast between the two fields. Taking these three pieces

into account, I would conclude that Im most closely aligned with the paradigm of post-
 Brendan Spencer
September 13, 2017

positivism, in terms of life and research, such that I believe that knowledge and truth are definite

and independent of human influence (not meaning research or evidence, but in this case

observationally), but also that our objective truth is not a holistic one in that not all can be

determined through our flawed processes of discovery.

Talk about your positionality to research by discussing which research paradigms "speak"
to you and why. Where would you locate your ontology, epistemology, and methodological
approach to research? (You can consider this question as it relates to work you do in your
discipline, future research that you might do, or the CBR/participatory work that we will
do in this course.) Its fine if you feel like you "straddle" various paradigms - talk about
why and in which situations might you find yourself in one paradigm as opposed to
another.