According to Guba and Lincoln, renunciation of mixed methods is characteristic of a moribund culture with the possible exception of human sciences. The question I raise here is whether a person can be considered a humanist only if he or she mixes methods, and I analyze Leibniz’s search for a universal system of justice to test this hypothesis. Considering the difference between a methodology and a mere approach, I also consider the issue of whether acquiring knowledge of any methodology always entails an approach. I stress the relationship between the concepts of “paradigm” and “culture” as a set of habits linked to mixed methods, and I conclude with an explanation of how mixing methods can be first sequential and, then, concurrent.
AarsleffH. (1989). The Berlin Academy under Frederick the Great. History of the Human Sciences, 2, 193-206.
2.
Andrés-GallegoJosé (2012a). A qué llamamos «cultura española» [What we call Spanish culture]. In Andrés-GallegoJ.de Llera EstebanL. (Eds). La cultura espaÞola del sigloXIX (pp. 9-68). LogroÞo: UNIR.
3.
Andrés-GallegoJosé (2012b). El replanteamiento de la filosofía del derecho en torno a 1600 como parte de un giro histœrico capital [Rethinking the philosophy of law around 1600 as part of a capital historical turn]. In Homenaje al profesor José Antonio Escudero (vol. 4, pp. 89-119). Madrid: Editorial Complutense.
4.
AranaJ. (2012). Los sótanos del universo: La determinación natural y sus mecanismos ocultos [The Cellars of the Universe: Natural Determination and Hidden Mechanisms]. Madrid, Spain: Biblioteca Nueva.
5.
BarnouwJ. (1995). The cognitive value of confusion and obscurity in the German Enlightenment: Leibniz, Baumgarten, and Herder. Studies in Eighteenth Century Culture, 24(1), 29-50.
6.
CodognetP. (2005). The semiotics of the web. Rocquencourt, France: INRIA.
7.
DascalM. (1987). Leibniz, language, signs, and thought. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
8.
De MauroT.FormigariL. (2010). Leibniz, Humboldt, and the origins of comparativism. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
9.
FeyerabendP. K. (1975). Against method: Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.
10.
FreshwaterD.CahillJ. (2012). Why write?Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(3), 151-153.
11.
GubaE. G.LincolnY. S. (1989). Fourth paradigm evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12.
GubaE. G.LincolnY. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluence. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 119-143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
GubaE. G.LincolnY. S. (2006): Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. In BrymanA. (Ed.), Mixed methods (Vol. 1, pp. 75-107). London, England: Sage.
14.
HondaH. (2004). Notas sobre a noçâo de inconsciente en Wundt e Leibniz. Psicologia: Teoria e pesquisa [Notes on the Notion of Unconscious in Wundt and Leibniz], 20, 275-277.
15.
Hoyningen-HueneP. (2002). Paul Feyerabend und Thomas Kuhn. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 33(1), 61-83.
16.
HsiaF. C. (2008). Chinese astronomy for the early modern European reader. Early Science and Medicine, 13, 417-450.
17.
IglesiasdeUsselJ.HerreraG. M. (Coordinators). (2005). Teorías sociológicas de la acción [Action sociological theories]. Madrid, Spain: Tecnos.
18.
IliffeR.KeynesM.HiggittR. (2006). Early biographies of Newton. London, England: Pickering & Chatto.
19.
JovenÁ. F. (2000). La polémica entre Leibniz y Johann Bernoulli acerca de los infinitesimales (¿Es Johann Bernoulli un precursor de Cantor?). Contrastes: Revista interdisciplinar de filosofía [The origin of evil as a privation in G.W. Leibniz’s philosophy], 5, 61-75.
20.
KantI. (1987). Sobre el tema del concurso para el año 1791 propuesto por la Academia de Berlín: Cuáles son los efectivos progresos que la metáfisica ha hecho en Alemania desde los tiempos de Leibniz y Wolff [On the issue of contest for the year 1791 proposed by Berlin Academy: What Real Progress has Metaphysics Made in Germany Since the Time of Leibniz and Wolff?] (Estudio preliminar y traducción de Félix Duque). Madrid, Spain: Tecnos. (Original work published 1791)
21.
KorsmeyerC. (1977). Is Pangloss Leibniz?Philosophy and Literature, 1, 201-208.
22.
KuhnT. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23.
LachD. F. (1945). Leibniz and China. Journal of History of Ideas, 6, 436-455.
24.
LatzerM. (1994). Leibniz’s conception of metaphysical evil. Journal of History of Ideas, 55(1), 1-15.
25.
López VillegasA. L. (2010). El origen del mal como privación en la filosofía de G. W. Leibniz [The origin of evil as a privation in G.W. Leibniz’s philosophy]. Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad de Costa Rica, 48(123-124), 149-154.
MertensD. M. (2012). What comes first? Paradigm or the approach. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(4), 255-257.
28.
MerzJ. T. (1948). Leibniz. New York, NY: Hacker.
29.
MothersillM. (1992). Fittingness (pp. 378-9). In BeckerL. C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of ethics. Chicago, IL: Garland.
30.
Muñoz-PérezF.-F.Encinar del PozoM. I. (2007). Teoría económica y acción humana: Su integración en la obra de Rafael Rubio de Urquía [Economic Theory and Human Action: Their Integration in Rafael Rubio de UrquÚa’s work]. Revista Empresa y Humanismo, 10, 117-160.
31.
Pérez LópezJ. (1991). Teoría de la acción humana en las organizaciones: La acción personal [Theory of Human Action in Organizations: The Personal Action]. Madrid, Spain: Rialp.
RamseyR. (2001). China and the ideal of order in John Webb’s “An historical essay”. Journal of History of Ideas, 62, 483-503.
34.
RooneyR. (1985). Roger Boscovich and the development of chemical theory. Journal of Chemical Education, 62, 848-851.
35.
RyanJ. A. (1996). Leibniz’ binary system and Shao Yong’s “Yijing.”Philosophy East and West, 46(1), 59-90.
36.
SadL. A. (2002). Problemas epistemológicos no período de emergência do cálculo infinitesimal [Epistemological problems in the emergency period of the infinitesimal calculus]. Revista brasileira de história da matemática, 2(3), 65-91.
37.
Shao-YunY. (2008). Becoming Zhongguo, becoming Han: Tracing and reconceptualization ethnicity in ancient North China, 770 BC-AD 581. Singapore: National University of Singapore.
38.
SteelwaterE. (1998). Humanism. In ChadwickR. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied ethics (Vol. II, pp. 641-649). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
39.
SwiderskyR. M. (1980). Bouvet and Leibniz: A scholarly correspondence. Eighteenth Century Studies, 14, 135-150.
40.
TylorF. B. (1958). Primitive culture. New York, NY: Harper & Row. (Original work published 1871)
41.
WebbJ. (1669). An historical essay endeavouring a probability that the language of the Empire of China is the primitive language. London, England: Nath. Brook.
42.
YoltonJ. W. (1995). Leibniz and the rational order of nature. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
