- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
Ships from: Mishawaka, IN
Usually ships in 1-2 business days
In the past it was generally taken for granted that the goal of social research was the production of objective knowledge; and that this required a commitment to value neutrality. In more recent times, however, both these ideals have come to be challenged, and it is often argued that all research is inevitably political in its assumptions and effects.
In this major contribution to the debate, Martyn Hammersley assesses the arguments from the classic and still influential contributions of C. Wright Mills, Howard Becker and Alvin Gouldner to the present day. He concludes that the case for partisanship is not convincing, and that an intelligent and sceptical commitment to the principles of objectivity and value neutrality must remain an essential feature of research.
|1||Taking sides in research: an assessment of the rationales for partisanship||16|
|2||Between Marx and Weber: C. Wright Mills on the role of the social scientist||35|
|3||Which side was Becker on? Questioning political and epistemological radicalism||60|
|4||Against Gouldner: on the fallacy of objective partisanship||90|
|5||Methodological purism: anatomy of a critique||124|
|6||Bias in social research||151|