|
Postmodernist perspectives in research have tended to embrace ambiguity, complexity, interconnectedness and
contradiction, and have sometimes been described as a rejection of the ‘Grand Theories’ of Modernism.
They have been said to reflect a view that previously taken-for-granted assumptions about the organizing
principles of social phenomena must be regarded sceptically, and often make use of irony, or even absurdity
in attempting to avoid the complacencies of the past. However, there are many instances in which models and
explanatory frameworks within which research has been positioned are performing a useful role as metaphor,
and have not been adopted naively or prescriptively. As travellers, we are usually aware that a map is not
the territory it represents. However, as researchers, inquiring into practice, are we always aware of the
domain within which that practice is situated? Descriptions of practice may sometimes mislead the uncritical
eye. For instance, we can ask ourselves whether we believe that a chef actually cooks by following a recipe.
Or is that recipe merely a formal description of a much more complex process drawing upon the chef’s contextual
understandings of his ingredients, tools and skills in producing ‘food’? Possibly, only someone who does not
know how to cook would think otherwise. We believe that there is a need for a critically-informed approach to
research, i.e. one which specifically attempts to shed light upon taken-for-granted assumptions and naîve
rationalities, illuminating metaphor and stimulating reflection. This ‘Hypermodernism’ includes recognition
that ‘Grand Theories’ may be useful as metaphors, i.e. a basis for practical philosophy.
Keywords:
metaphor; reflective practice; postmodernism; critical systemic thinking; contextual inquiry
Download FULL PAPER
Back to Contents
|
