Challenging Neorealism: A Response To Hammersley
Neorealism, Relativism, Research criteria
How researchers can go about judging, or adjudicating among, different knowledge claims recently has become a highly contested issue. In this response to Hammersley, we argue that he has not been able to justify his neorealist position that we can/must appeal to an independently existing reality, which can be known as it really is, to sort out our differences. To the contrary, we argue that we must accept relativism, not in the sense of "anything goes," but in the sense that as human beings we are finite. As a result, any criteria we pose for judging knowledge claims always is, as it must be, the product of time and place contingent agreement. © 2008 Sage Publications.
Department of Educational Psychology and Foundations
Original Publication Date
DOI of published version
Smith, John K. and Hodkinson, Phil, "Challenging Neorealism: A Response To Hammersley" (2009). Faculty Publications. 2295.