On
the
other
hand,
hermeneutic
rationality
(qualitative,
approach, study, understand, analyze and build knowledge; from processes of
interpretation where the validity and reliability of knowledge rests, ultimately,
on the rigor of the researcher. The construction of knowledge is assumed as a
subjective and intersubjective process. In the meantime, it is the subject who
constructs the research design, collects the information, organizes it and gives
it meaning from its previous conceptual structures; as well as the findings that
arise from the research itself, which are then collectivized and discussed in the
academic community.
Erlandson, Harris, Skipper and Allen (1993), contrast traditional
(quantitative) design with emergent design (typical of the inquiry derived from
the naturalist paradigm). The difference between the two lies in the specificity
of the original research plan.
If qualitative research seeks to understand meanings; quantitative
studies try to know little explored issues through the effectiveness of
techniques.
Stake (1999: 41), noted:
“This distinction between quantitative and qualitative methods
is a matter of emphasis - since reality is the mixture of one and
the other. In any ethnographic, naturalistic, hermeneutical or
holistic study (eg, in any qualitative study) the enumeration and
recognition of the difference in quantity occupy a prominent
place. And in any statistical study or controlled experiment (eg,
in any quantitative study) the natural language with which they
are described and the interpretation of the researched are
important”.
For Hashimoto and Saavedra (2014: 8), “The discussion has to focus on
why I should or have to use that or another method, or in what I should look for
or use that data or method”. That is the crux of the matter, to resolve this
question is on the philosophical and not methodological level.
12
Editorial
phenomenological, naturalistic, humanistic or ethnographic) seeks a way to