For some reason, I’m flashing back to my last class in Contemporary Theory in Psychology last April. At the end of the lecture, the professor handed out the questions for the final exam. I know what you’re thinking! The PROFESSOR handed out the QUESTIONS for the FINAL EXAM! How awesome is that?! The entire class got the questions ahead of time and instead of trying to study an entire semester’s worth of information in five days, we could focus our efforts, concentrating on certain material, really developing a deep understanding of certain theoretical perspectives! SWEET!
And then I read the first question:
“It is in the nature of the interplay between ontology and epistemology that, lacking a settled and defensible ontology, there is no rational basis on which to choose a mode of inquiry. In order to establish what there is it is necessary to have the right sort of method, but then the right sort of method already presupposes at least a provisional answer to the question of what there is.” - Dan Robinson (2007). Argue why you agree or disagree with Robinson by comparing two theoretical perspectives we have studied this year.
Uh…all of the above?
