Reflexive debate on use of philosophy in scienctific research

Abstract

How should philosophy be used in scientific research? is the question addressed in this paper. The aim of this desktop research was to critically contribute to the already ongoing debate around the use of philosophy in scientific research and to propose a user friendly framework on how to integrate philosophical decisions with methodological decisions. This paper argues that the content and length of a research does not make it scientific, but its philosophical foundation and related methodologies. It also shows that use of philosophy in research is not merely a recitation, repetition and dumping of borrowed words, but a reasoned and careful re-contextualization of philosophical assumptions to apply them to one’s own research thesis. There is also no such a thing as epistemological and ontological monovalence because there are many ways of creating and understanding reality and, moreover, which paradigmatic framework is ‘better’ partly depends on the research question(s) one seeks to answer. Only if we understood each philosophy and its assumptions, would we be in a better position to challenge them and, reflexively think differently.