Post by mizumi on Dec 1, 2017 18:51:36 GMT
Phenomenological definitions
How would a phenomenological definition of a concept (marriage, autism, greed, for example) differ from an objective one? How would one go about evaluating the quality of a particular phenomenological definition that someone proposed for one of these concepts?
phenomenology is related to how interactions appear to other participants, marriage for example may appear differently to others than the married couple, a certain way husband and wife interact may seems appropriate to them but not to others who perceive them. With regard to autism it's very similar idea the person who has autism experiences it in a certain way, others that perceive that person may or may not understand how that person experience it, however they're able to observe how that person interacts and derive certain conclusions from that interaction. In the case of greed, the person who is being greedy may even not be aware of their actions and how they interact, and so others that perceive that person in their interaction would compare their behaviour with social norms and be able to identify their behaviour as being greedy (which is seen as negative).
The evaluation of the quality of these concepts would have to be in comparison with certain norms in the society with regards to these concepts, by examining how they're socially constructed and viewed (with any carriers that may apply)
How would a phenomenological definition of a concept (marriage, autism, greed, for example) differ from an objective one? How would one go about evaluating the quality of a particular phenomenological definition that someone proposed for one of these concepts?
phenomenology is related to how interactions appear to other participants, marriage for example may appear differently to others than the married couple, a certain way husband and wife interact may seems appropriate to them but not to others who perceive them. With regard to autism it's very similar idea the person who has autism experiences it in a certain way, others that perceive that person may or may not understand how that person experience it, however they're able to observe how that person interacts and derive certain conclusions from that interaction. In the case of greed, the person who is being greedy may even not be aware of their actions and how they interact, and so others that perceive that person in their interaction would compare their behaviour with social norms and be able to identify their behaviour as being greedy (which is seen as negative).
The evaluation of the quality of these concepts would have to be in comparison with certain norms in the society with regards to these concepts, by examining how they're socially constructed and viewed (with any carriers that may apply)