Naturalistic Inquiry and Reliabilism: A Compatible Epistemological Grounding

Abstract

In this brief analysis, the authors suggest that naturalistic inquiry as a field must return to a more rigorous interpretation of epistemological issues. The need is highlighted by the fact that ideological and methodological claims are increasingly becoming conflated. This produces a distancing of what is truly at stake: a need to defend a genuine epistemological theory consistent with the aims of naturalistic perspectives and establish some ontological commitments as a result. The authors argue that the epistemological theory of process reliabilism is worth examining critically. They also suggest its consistency with the ontological claims of minimal realism.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Audi, R. (1999). The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Goldman, A. I. (1986). Epistemology and cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Goldman, A. I. (1992). Liaisons: Philosophy meets the cognitive and social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a social world. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

Haack, S. (1993). Epistemological reflections of an old feminist. Reason Papers, 18, 31-43.

Lincoln, Y. S. , & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Longino, H. E. (1999). Feminist epistemology. In J. Greco & E. Sosa (Eds.), Epistemology (pp. 327-353). London: Blackwell.

Lynch, M. P. (1998). Truth in context: An essay on pluralism and objectivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Manicas, P. T. , & Kruger, A. N. (1976). Logic: The essentials. New York: McGraw-Hill.

10.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interpretive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

11.

Moser, P. K. (1993). Philosophy after objectivity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

12.

Schmitt, F. (1999). Social epistemology. In J. Greco & E. Sosa (Eds.), Epistemology (pp. 354-382). London: Blackwell.

13.

Searle, J. (1995). The construction of social reality. New York: Free Press.

14.

Smith, J. K. (1983). Quantitative versus qualitative research: An attempt to clarify the issue. Educational Researcher, 12, 6-13.

15.

Smith, J. K. , & Heshusius, L. (1986). Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational researchers. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-12.

16.

Tashakkori, A. , & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (Vol. 46, Applied Social Research Methods Series). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.