Having perused some of my classmates’ blogs, I noticed that a trend emerged. My classmates are trying to align themselves with the theories covered in class. I find this encouraging because it shows that we are thinking about the theories and evaluating our beliefs based on those theories.
However, theory can be limiting. As mentioned in class, theory is not the truth. It is more of a tool to help explain why things are the way they are. I often equate applying theory to fitting the square peg of the research findings into the round hole of the theory. It may fit, but it will not fit perfectly. Introductions to academic literature read like a finely tuned recipe with a half cup of Foucault, a pinch of classical Marxism for kicks, and spoonful of neo-Gramscian theory to temper it all. Layering theories does not necessarily lead to contradictions; it provides a more eclectic view from more than one perspective.
Understanding and applying theory can take a lifetime and even then it may not be fully understood or correctly applied.
I just ask that you wait a little longer, try not to subscribe to one theory, and to keep an open mind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Are you ready for this?
ReplyDeleteWhy did you choose research to be the square peg and theory to be the round hole it goes through? Could you not have said that research was the round peg and theory was the square hole?
Both formats would work (sizing being an issue for both). Does the square and circle hold a different meaning as well for you? I guess I am asking WHY did you choose to set up of your analogy they way you did?
(That didn't sound very functionalist did it??) :)
There is no significance in the shape for the research or for the theory. I wanted to make the point that the research and theory never make a perfect fit.
ReplyDelete