The
standards by which the quality and rigorousness of this strand of [spiritual] research are
assessed, are not the replication of an experiment, as is customary within
objectivity-based natural sciences, but rather resonance and emotional evocation.
Anthropologist Ruth Behar (1997) expresses this in proposing a science based on
a “vulnerable observer”. She calls this an anthropology that “breaks your heart”
(p.17).
Research often carries with it misleading ideas that the researcher has these tools at her or his disposal to see the world in an objective way. In reality, I believe that perhaps good research requires the ability to be broken in many ways: by complexity, by uncertainty, by the need to continually change and revise, and by the very depressing (at times) prospect of realizing that one has reached a dead end or may need to revise their questions and topics completely. I wonder, do courses in research actually prepare researchers for these emotional realities and spiritual insights in doing research? Or are these aspects of the spiritual life of researchers perhaps under-studied? Research in and of itself is a spiritual journey which involves continually questioning the researcher self, as well as allowing the researcher's heart to be broken many times.
Ergas, O. (2016). Knowing the
Unknown. In Toward a Spiritual Paradigm:
Exploring New Ways of Knowing, Researching, and Being. Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment