## Comparing Constructivist, Positivist, and Post-Positivist Philosophies --- topic: [[Researching]] people: #people/generativeai created: 2023-02-17 --- *Your scientific question should guide the philosophy you choose for your research.* This post compares three different philosophies of science: constructivism, positivism, and post-positivism. These philosophies have different assumptions about the nature of reality, knowledge, and methods of inquiry. ![[AM_Last_Page__A_Guide_to_Research_Paradigms.32.pdf]] ## What is Constructivism? [[Constructivism]] is a philosophy that maintains that scientific knowledge is constructed by the scientific community, who seek to measure and construct models of the natural world. According to constructivists, there is no objective reality independent of our perception and interpretation. Rather, reality is determined by our experiences as learners. Constructivists emphasize the role of social discourse, culture, values, and personal meanings in shaping our understanding of phenomena. ## What is Post-Positivism? [[post-positivist]] is a metatheoretical stance that critiques and amends positivism. Post-positivists share some similarities with positivists in terms of valuing empirical evidence and logical reasoning. However, post-positivists also acknowledge some limitations of positivism. For example: - Post-positivists argue that theories, hypotheses, background knowledge and values of the researcher can influence what is observed. - Post-positivists recognize that human knowledge is not based on solid unchallengeable tenets but rather on tentative conjectures subject to revision. - Post-positivists accept that there may be multiple perspectives and interpretations of reality depending on different contexts and paradigms. ## What is Positivism? [[Positivism]] is an empiricist philosophy that holds that all genuine knowledge is either true by definition or positive —meaning a posteriori facts derived by reason and logic from sensory experience. Positivists believe that there is an existing reality apart from our own perception of it and that science is the only way of finding the truth. Positivists reject other ways of knowing, such as theology, metaphysics, intuition, or introspection. Positivists aim to discover universal laws and causal relationships through observation, experimentation, and verification. ## How do they compare? The table below summarizes some key differences among constructivism, positivism, and post-positivism. | Philosophy | Ontology (nature of reality) | Epistemology (nature of knowledge) | Methodology (approach to inquiry) | | ---------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Constructivism | Reality is subjective, constructed by human experience | Knowledge is personal, contextual, interpretive | Qualitative methods, such as interviews,observations, narratives | | Post- Positivism | Reality is complex, probabilistic and multiple | Knowledge is tentative, corrigible and fallible | Mixed methods, such as triangulation, replication and falsification | | Positivism | Reality is objective, independent of human perception | Knowledge is factual, universal, generalizable | Quantitative methods, such as experiments, surveys, statistics | ## Conclusion Constructivism, positivism and post- positivism are three philosophies that have different implications for how we conduct scientific inquiry. Depending on your research question and purpose you may adopt one or more of these philosophies as your guiding framework. (Notation: This post was written by generative AI through Bing on 2023-02-17 with the prompt "compare the constructivist, positivist, and post-positivist philosophies") #on/generativeai | #on/science | #on/research | #on/philosophy | #note/idea ## Sources: Bergman, E., De Feijter, J., Frambach, J., Godefrooij, M., Slootweg, I., Stalmeijer, R., & Van Der Zwet, J. (2012). AM Last Page: A Guide to Research Paradigms Relevant to Medical Education. _Academic Medicine_, _87_(4), 545. [https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31824fbc8a](https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31824fbc8a)