Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The nature of reality has long been the topic of philosophical debate. In general, the debate falls along a continuum. At one end, reality is objective, existing independent of us. It is out there, waiting to be discovered. At the other end, reality is subjective, continually being co-created by us. It is dynamic and changing. What the researcher believes about the nature of reality is critical. The questions asked by the researcher who falls closer to the objective end of the continuum will be different from the questions asked by the researcher who falls closer to the subjective end.

The nature of reality is related to discussions of ontology, epistemology, and methodology. Ontology has to do with our assumptions regarding how the world works. Epistemology has to do with how we know what we know. Methodology has to do with how we go about investigating reality and making knowledge claims. What we believe leads to questions about our relationship to the world, how we understand it, and how we study it. Some people believe that the world shapes us and that we react to what is happening around us. Others believe that we shape the world and can control our own destinies. Still others take a stance somewhere in between these two views.

Perspectives on the Nature of Reality

There are many perspectives on the nature of reality. They can be traced through the development of scientific thinking through the ages. For purposes of illustration, three major periods are briefly described: prescientific revolution, scientific revolution, and postmodern.

Before the scientific revolution (pre-1500s), reality was commonly conceived of as both natural and supernatural. A natural world co-existed with a spirit world. Reality consisted of both worlds. Not everything that happened had an explanation; thus, a degree of mystery was acceptable. Primary sources of knowledge were mysticism and revelation. With the rise of the scientific revolution, the degree of mystery that could be tolerated changed.

The scientific revolution is linked closely with the Enlightenment following the Middle Ages. The emphasis was on rationality, science, and reason. People such as René Descartes and Isaac Newton proposed that there were natural laws to explain reality and that those laws could be discovered. Descartes advocated deductive reasoning, coming to conclusions based on observable facts using reason and logic. Newton explained the principle of gravity, dispelling myths associated with that phenomenon. In addition, he suggested that the universe was like a giant clock and that if we understood its parts, we would understand the whole. This kind of thinking formed the basis of the scientific method and has been dominant for centuries. It is the basis of the positivist objective approach to research.

Recently, the positivist approach has been challenged by postmodern thinking. Postmodern thinking argues that the scientific method, as it has been advocated, has not served us well. The idea that the whole can be understood from its parts leads to fragmentation of systems and thinking. The postmodern approach suggests that the whole is greater than its parts. Deductive reasoning provides only partial explanations, and it is possible to understand the general by studying the particular. The possibility that there are multiple realities is presented. This is a more subjective approach to research.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading