The paper "The Interpretivist Paradigm" is an outstanding example of a research proposal on social science. Interpretivism views are said to have many different origins depending on the kind of discipline in question. Following the critiques that were made about the paradigm of positivism and its associated drawbacks, this paradigm was proposed a group of people who research and championed for its application (Lder2010). There was Schultz Cicourel and Garfinkel who both originated from the phenomenological and sociological schools of thought; as a result, they were staff colleagues from the School of Sociology in Chicago.
This paper will examine the various paradigms that have been developed by various theorists, as well as the contribution of other people in the support of these perspectives Theories of Interpretivism The final research paper will focus on the theory of interpretivism, here; it will emphasize on the contributions that have been made by the proponents of this theory, their background as well as the motivation that drove them towards developing this theory. Symbolic Interactionism The final paper will have an elaborate analysis of symbolic interactionism as a supporting theory to interpretivism, which is a view that was developed and proposed by Mead George between 1863-1931.
In his perspective, George viewed the interaction as a way of creating and recreating social structures that were responsible for setting the society to live (Welch 2013). Labeling Theory This theory will also feature prominently in the final paper, it a theory that was proposed by Tannenbaum between 1950-1960. Through the study of deviant behavior, Tannenbaum was able to establish the labeling theory of social reaction, in his assertion, the theorist emphasized on the tendency of linguistics to label minorities negatively, something that he described as a deviation from the norm.
It is important to understand that all Interpretivists have common perspectives relating to the nature of knowledge as well as reality, In this regard, their beliefs on ontology and epistemology are the same. The final paper will make an analysis of the way these two theories have influenced the views of interpretivism, focusing on how they have applied in various disciplines as outlined in the perspective itself.
Ontological and Epistemological Perspectives of Interpretivists. In the final paper, ontological and epistemological perspectives of interpretivism will be analyzed extensively. However, it is important to note that as far as ontology is concerned, Interpretivists assume that reality, as we know it is a subject that is brought about by inter-subjectivity, such that, people’ s meaning and comprehension of issues through social structures and experience build their knowledge. For this reason, the things that people go through and do on a daily basis are important sources of knowledge and reality in their subjective thinking and perspectives.
On the other hand, with reference to epistemology, they posit that it is impossible to separate people from what they know and understand. In this case, the investigator of the subject and the object in question are directly associated such that the things we know and our understanding of the world are part of who we are. The Interpretivism paradigm has largely been applied in the field of law; the paradigm asserts that law in itself is not necessarily a set of data that is made available (Pavlakos2007).
Instead, it is what lawyers aim to construct or obtain in the course of their practice. In addition, the perspective holds that law is not imminent in nature, rather, it is simply the opposite of the main theory of natural law.
Lder, B. (2010). Mind ascribed an elaboration and defence of interpretivism. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins Pub.
Pavlakos, G. (2007). Our knowledge of the law objectivity and practice in legal theory.Oxford: Hart Pub.
Welch, S. (2013). The theory of political culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.