The Nuts and Bolts of Research

When it comes to paradigms I consider myself to be a mixture between both a critical

realist and constructivist. This is because I know certain things out there exist but at the same

time we as individuals have an influence on how we perceive things. This is what leads to

differing opinions because a fact can be interpreted many ways based on the individual. I enjoy

this because I feel you should not take anything at face value, you should dissect it through all

the interpretations until you know how you feel on the matter. Overall, I feel that I am a critical

realist, with a subjective epistemology, and my method is to take a dialectic approach,

First off, I am a critical realist because I know certain things exist out there but

everyones opinions influence their thoughts on the matter. For example, I feel religion can be an

example of this approach. With different religions everyone knows a higher being exist that

created them and there is something for them after death. However, the different religions

influence their beliefs on what that is. With Christians they are influenced to believe it is God

whereas Buddhism believes it is multiple Gods. I feel this translates to everything because

something can be a fact, like the sky is blue, but if someone is influenced to believe it is green

then they will not see the truth.

Next, I also have a subjective approach with my epistemology, which goes along with my

constructivism ontology. This is because with constructivism you believe each individual designs

their own reality based on their interpretations on concepts. I believe everything is based on

peoples opinions; you cannot force someone to believe something that they do not want to.

Everything is open to interpretation by everyone so there are multiple ideas and I enjoy this

because I feel it is what creates diversity as well as stimulating conversations. If everyone

believed what was stated to them then it would be like mindless robots who wont differ on

anything.

Finally, I also take a dialectic approach when doing research. When taking a dialectic

approach, it means to compare and contrast different points of view. For example, this approach

is like a debate, each side is presented and then you come to the conclusion of which side is

better. I like to take this approach because I like to look at each side of an argument before I

form my opinion on it. I also do not like to take everything at face value and I like to get down to

the root of why something is the way it is. For example, I took this approach when informing

myself on the recent issues of immigration that have arose with Trumps presidency. I am

personally a Republican, but I have never felt that strongly on deportation as other members of

the party. I also do not want to make a decision based on what I am supposed to believe.

Therefore, I looked at what liberals stated and republicans to be better informed and make my

decision on the subject.

Overall, I feel it is safe to say that I am an analyzer when it comes to research. I like to

dissect a topic and be able to understand it from all angles. I also like this approach because it

stimulates conversations and adds diversity. I also feel this is the best way to go about research

because not only will you be able to understand something but you can also work on improving

it if possible.