ABSTRACT

Critical realist thought has theorised convincingly that epistemic relativism is constellationally embedded in ontological realism which in turn necessitates judgemental rationality. In social science, judgemental rationality involves acting upon plausible decisions about competing points of view. However, the tools for doing this are, as yet, under-articulated. This paper addresses this absence by articulating triangulation and depth-reflexivity as two tools for doing judgemental rationality in empirical research. It draws on the experiences of a diverse team working on an international comparative research project on conversion to Islam in prisons. It demonstrates how epistemic and relational gaps between researchers and research subjects can be bridged by mobilising the ‘laminated’ properties and personal attributes of a diverse research team that factors in attributes that are absent as well as those present. The biographical experiences of the team are analyzed in a variety of intersecting dimensions: faith, ethnicity/ethno-culture, gender, class and professionality.

摘要

批判现实主义思想令人信服地认为，认知相对主义在星座上嵌入本体现实主义，这反过来又需要判断理性。在社会科学中，判断理性涉及对竞争观点的合理决定采取行动。然而，用于执行此操作的工具尚未明确。本文通过阐明三角测量和深度反射作为在实证研究中进行判断理性的两种工具来解决这种缺失。它借鉴了一个多元化团队的经验，该团队致力于在监狱中皈依伊斯兰教的国际比较研究项目。它展示了如何通过调动多元化研究团队的“分层”属性和个人属性来弥合研究人员和研究对象之间的认知和关系鸿沟，这些研究团队将不存在和存在的属性考虑在内。团队的传记经历从不同的交叉维度进行分析：信仰、种族/民族文化、性别、阶级和专业。