The Challenge of Critical Realism
Critical Realism: What We Know and What is Real
Before anything else, a quick dip into Critical Realism.
There are three principles in critical realism that is posited by Bhaskar (1975). One is Ontological Realism- that the world is independent of our perception and knowing, therefore the world exists outside of how we perceive and understand it. Two, is Epistemic Relativism, that knowledge is produced socially, therefore it is a product of social and linguistic conditions. As it is a social product, it can also be fallible and changeable. Lastly, there’s Judgmental Rationality- an idea that states that it is possible and necessary to engage in the evaluation of different and conflicting assertions about the world because there are rational grounds for doing so.
In Ontological Realism, I recognize that reality exists beyond me and my understanding of it. As a researcher, I recognize that reality consists of three domains- the domain of the empirical, which is limited to what humanity can observe and experience; the domain of the actual, (events) which can be perceived or unperceived, and which can exist beyond my experience of it; and lastly, there’s the domain of the real, which also includes the actual and the empirical, in which causal powers and generative mechanisms exist, a reality independent of the knower and of knowing.
Because of the vastness of reality, it might be easier and more comfortable to reduce reality to what we know. But this reductionist thinking is an epistemic fallacy- we shouldn’t conflate reality itself with our knowledge of it. To counter this reductionist thinking, we are introduced to the two dimensions of knowing- the transitive and intransitive dimensions which, as mentioned earlier, recognizes the transitivity of knowledge (historically conditioned and socially produced) and the intransitivity of reality (reality being independent of the knower).
Epistemic Relativism contends that knowledge is produced socially, therefore it is a product of social and linguistic conditions. We are reminded that the world, and reality, is experienced differently by different people. But this does not mean that everyone is right, either. The burden and beauty of epistemic relativism is that we are challenged to be epistemologically sound. We need to evaluate knowledge because we exist in reality and because knowledge is fallible. As a researcher, I am challenged to apply academic and critical thinking- not just to answer questions, but to engage in the art of pondering, and of metacognition; to examine underlying assumptions and consider different perspectives and positions and to examine implications and seek for new approaches and questions; and lastly, to treat knowledge not as a laser that focuses and analyzes sharply, but as a lamp that illuminates slowly and dimly.
Judgmental Rationality reminds us to evaluate different and conflicting assertions about the world because there are rational grounds for doing so. Judgmental Rationality considers both Ontological Realism and Epistemic Relativism in a sense that Ontological Realism makes it possible for Judgmental Rationality to occur as the intransitive world serves as the basis for its exercise, while Epistemic Relativism necessitates it- because our knowledge is transitive and there are plural assertions of the same world, it should therefore be evaluated, and Judgmental Rationality is to be exercised.
The Challenge As a Researcher
As a researcher I am challenged to go beyond what I know, and to investigate the causes of my observation rather than simply being content to describe what is happening around me. I am also challenged to recognize the limitations of my knowledge and knowing in capturing reality.
As a researcher, being very sure of something would be a red flag. This might mean that I have become too complacent instead of evaluative, this might mean that I have become a ‘lazy thinker’. It’s so much easier to be a naïve realist, to have uncritical reliance on authority and limited regard for evidence and argument- and even critical thinking; or to be a radical relativist, to have uncritical disregard for or idiosyncratic use of authority and have no critical thinking at all. But as a critical realist, I understand that knowledge is neither a fact nor is it an opinion- rather, it is a judgment. It’s something that we work toward, and it’s something that we make rather than blindly accept.
My research seeks to understand how educators and the educational system integrates the Lumads of Mindanao’s indigenous knowledge systems and practices (IKSPs) into pedagogy, practice, and policy, transforming formal education. Thus, I also recognize that my knowledge is limited. Most of the available literature that I have read on colonialism, particularly on colonial education, are from Africa, Oceania, and some parts of Asia like Singapore and Vietnam. There is even more literature from France, America, and Australia, as, ironically, the discussion on postcolonialism and decolonization is still anchored on frameworks from the West and from the colonizers themselves (Abdi, 2012). There are studies about these topics in the Philippines, but I have yet to access or find them, as the ones I have encountered are very few.
My exposure with Lumad IKSPs are also limited to what I have experienced, read, and studied, and to a few observations that I’ve had. I recognize that my experiences and my knowledge of culture and colonialism belong to the domain of the empirical, that there is a whole domain (of the actual) that I can still draw more from. I also recognize that my work and the knowledge that results from it are how I make sense of the context we exist in and wouldn’t capture reality as a whole. While I recognize the finitude of my work, I also acknowledge the importance of studying it, as changes in the curriculum change the knowledge discourse (Dyck, 2005).
The Challenge As a Critical Thinker (?) and As a Person
The question mark in the heading has a purpose. It can either mean 1.) I am unsure whether I truly am a critical thinker- I do question that every day; or that 2.) it (the challenge) is an open question in which answers continue to change as more and more challenges present themselves.
I am challenged to reflect on my daily interactions and on what I absorb and perceive every day. As I am bombarded with information, critical thinking helps me filter out the noise- the unnecessary things that serve as 'fillers' (Except those things that make me laugh- like memes and cat videos. Those are important too!) I am also more mindful of conversations and interactions I have with others. When there are things that I don't agree with I find myself asking, 'maybe his/her experience and even source of knowledge was different?' before I speak. While, of course, understanding the transitivity of knowledge and considering the intransitivity of reality. (For instance, we can discuss whether Martial Law was necessary or unnecessary, but not deny that it happened.) Having this in mind makes me communicate my thoughts and ideas better, and helps me become a more empathic yet discerning listener.
I am also challenged to change my mindset. Knowing that what I know and experience only captures the empirical makes me feel helpless at times. The infiniteness of reality can be very daunting. This constantly reminds me of 'intellectual humility'. We can't know everything, even if we try. But, there are things worth knowing and worth affecting- things that could help solve 'wicked problems', and that could influence positive change. Life is too short for an existential crisis (haha). No, but really- life is too short for us not to contribute good things to this world and leave a legacy. So I will try my best to do what I can with the time and resources I am given. Especially because what we do in this earth outlives us. I am also reminded to live my life with as much passion and purpose as possible. In the end, I'd like to leave this world better than when I entered it. Even if it means doing whatever little good I can do, no matter how insignificant the world might deem it to be... because it means so much to the people I can help, and it means so much me.
References:
Abdi, A. A. (2012). Decolonizing philosophies of education. In Decolonizing Philosophies of Education (pp. 1–13). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-687-8_1
Dyck, L. R. (2005). Redefined rhetorics: Academic discourse and Aboriginal students. Paper presented at the First Nations, First Thoughts Conference Canadian Studies Centre, University of Edinburgh, May 5- 6, 2005.
Comments
Post a Comment