Bracketing
From Geography
JannaVolpel (Talk | contribs) |
JannaVolpel (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | + | Bracketing is a technique applied in the approach to social science by [[Alfred Schütz]]. The aim of the technique is to arrive at better observation in phenomenological research. But the approach also has philosophical roots: According to [[Edmund Husserl]], bracketing is the “reduction of phenomenological information” (Campbell, 1981, p. 200). In the philosophy of Husserl – which is the basis to Alfred Schütz´s [[phenomenological approach]] bracketing refers to freeing oneself from experiences to arrive on a level of the pure [[consciousness]]. It is about bracketing the “belief in reality” (ibid.) of the exterior world of experience meaning that one abandons “presupposition about society”. Yet Schütz is less strict about the depth of bracketing than Husserl in his philosophy: For Schütz it is only relevant to arrive at the level of “[[psycho-analysis]]” involving “reflection on past events” (ibid.). The aim of Schütz can already be attained at this level – to be able to “analyse the world as appearing to consciousness”. Objects do not carry typifications anymore but appear as mere “[[structure]]s”. This is because the identification of objects can only take place through the “making sense” by “experience”(ibid.) which has been bracketed away. The necessity of achieving this goal is grounded on assumptions from Schütz theory of man. Schütz´s belief is that the roots of problems in social science can be traced only by coing back to the “fundamental facts of conscious life“ (ibid.). The underlying idea of the method is thus that “social life is located in the experience of the individual”, in the “presupposition about realities of other people” (ibid., p. 201). In order to attain good results for research, the researcher has to bracket this own baggage, to gain a certain degree of objectivity as observer: the “disinterested observer abandons practical realities”, is “free from anxiety” by “bracketing his personal existence for the duration of hisscientific work” and leaving his role as “participant of society” (ibid., p. 211)., The final observation or end product is a “construct of constructs”, the “meaning of social life” for actors of society. Of the latter the researcher can make a “coherent picture” “as system” (ibid., p. 212). But without bracketing the researcher as any actor else is “free interpreting himself […] in accordance with typifications [taken from the common stock of knowledge of society or his community] […] [and based on his] own interests” (ibid., p. 213). | |
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| Line 27: | Line 25: | ||
Edited by Janna Völpel (3015041)[[User:JannaVolpel|JannaVolpel]] 14:18, 7 May 2012 (CEST) | Edited by Janna Völpel (3015041)[[User:JannaVolpel|JannaVolpel]] 14:18, 7 May 2012 (CEST) | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | |||
Latest revision as of 12:19, 7 May 2012
Bracketing is a technique applied in the approach to social science by Alfred Schütz. The aim of the technique is to arrive at better observation in phenomenological research. But the approach also has philosophical roots: According to Edmund Husserl, bracketing is the “reduction of phenomenological information” (Campbell, 1981, p. 200). In the philosophy of Husserl – which is the basis to Alfred Schütz´s phenomenological approach bracketing refers to freeing oneself from experiences to arrive on a level of the pure consciousness. It is about bracketing the “belief in reality” (ibid.) of the exterior world of experience meaning that one abandons “presupposition about society”. Yet Schütz is less strict about the depth of bracketing than Husserl in his philosophy: For Schütz it is only relevant to arrive at the level of “psycho-analysis” involving “reflection on past events” (ibid.). The aim of Schütz can already be attained at this level – to be able to “analyse the world as appearing to consciousness”. Objects do not carry typifications anymore but appear as mere “structures”. This is because the identification of objects can only take place through the “making sense” by “experience”(ibid.) which has been bracketed away. The necessity of achieving this goal is grounded on assumptions from Schütz theory of man. Schütz´s belief is that the roots of problems in social science can be traced only by coing back to the “fundamental facts of conscious life“ (ibid.). The underlying idea of the method is thus that “social life is located in the experience of the individual”, in the “presupposition about realities of other people” (ibid., p. 201). In order to attain good results for research, the researcher has to bracket this own baggage, to gain a certain degree of objectivity as observer: the “disinterested observer abandons practical realities”, is “free from anxiety” by “bracketing his personal existence for the duration of hisscientific work” and leaving his role as “participant of society” (ibid., p. 211)., The final observation or end product is a “construct of constructs”, the “meaning of social life” for actors of society. Of the latter the researcher can make a “coherent picture” “as system” (ibid., p. 212). But without bracketing the researcher as any actor else is “free interpreting himself […] in accordance with typifications [taken from the common stock of knowledge of society or his community] […] [and based on his] own interests” (ibid., p. 213).
References
Campbell, T. (1981). Alfred Schutz: a phenomenological approach. In Campbell, T. (Eds.), Seven Theories of Human Society. Calvedon Press: Oxford.
Scott A, Husserl’s Ideas on a Pure Phenomenology and on a Phenomenological Philosophy ,http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/husserl.html, 11 october 2010.
Bracketing (2011). Vinddatum 17 december 2011, op Wikipedia, op http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bracketing_%28phenomenology%29
Contributors
Published by Robbert Vossers (4080939).14:18, 7 May 2012 (CEST)
Links added --GijsJansen 17:08, 20 October 2011 (CEST) JannaVolpel 14:18, 7 May 2012 (CEST)
Information added by --CasparEngelen 16:15, 17 December 2011 (CET) & Natasja van Lieshout JannaVolpel 14:18, 7 May 2012 (CEST)
Edited by Janna Völpel (3015041)JannaVolpel 14:18, 7 May 2012 (CEST)
