University of wales

1 Alan Bryman (2001) Quantity and Quality in Social Research (London: Routledge) p. 96.

2 As opposed to the Many Worlds interpretation particularly that of Everett. Vide: Claus Kiefer (2002) ‘On the interpretation of quantum theory – from Copenhagen to the present day.’ Available at: http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0210152v1 Last accessed 30/11/10.

3 “von Neumann introduced the dynamical collapse of the wave function as a new law. The collapse should then select one component with the probability |cn|2. He even envisaged that the collapse is eventually caused by the consciousness of a human observer, an interpretation that was later also adopted by Wigner.” Claus Kiefer, op.cit., p.6.

4 There is thus no disturbance of the system by the apparatus – on the contrary, the apparatus is disturbed by the system (in order to yield a measurement result). Claus Kiefer, op.cit., p.5.

5 Ibid.

6 Peter Fenwick and David Lorimer (1989) ‘Can Brains be Conscious?’ New Scientist, August 5 1989, p.56.

7 Vide: Werner Thurau (2008) Galileo’s Shadow: Thoughts on Physics after Scientific Determinism (Charleston, SC: BookSurge Publishing).

8 Hence Einstein’s ‘E=MC²’.

9 All objects are motionless relative to absolute space but in motion compared to other objects. Vide: Donald Hamilton ‘Absolute Space - Relative Motion.’ Available at: http://novan.com/spcenrgy.htm
Last accessed 03/12/10.

10 Peter Fenwick and David Lorimer, op. cit., p.56.

11 Milgram, Stanley (1963) ‘Behavioral study of obedience.’ Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963, 67, p. 373. The experiment consisted of innocent subjects giving what they believed to be electric shocks up to 240v to fellow participants (in fact stooges) if the latter wrongly answered questions. The purpose was to test conformity and obedience in the innocent subjects.

12 Gary Alan Fine (2000) ‘Ethnography and Experiment in Social Psychological Theory Building: Tactics for Integrating Qualitative Field Data with Quantitative Lab Data.’ Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 36, p.69. Available at: http://www.rnd.ncnu.edu.tw/hdcheng/research/quan%2Bqual.pdf Last accessed 30/11/10.

13 Vide: Jan De Vos (2009) ‘Now that you know, how do you feel? The Milgram experiment and psychologization.’ Annual Review of Critical Psychology, 2009 (7), pp. 223 – 246.

14 Toni Raiten-D’Antonio (2010) Ugly as Sin: The Truth About How We Look and Finding Freedom from Self-Hatred (Deerfield Beach, FL: HCI) p. 89.

15 Vide: David S. Walonick (1993) ‘Everything you want to know about questionnaires.’ Available at: http://www.statpac.com/research-papers/questionnaires.htm 18 pages. Last accessed 03/12/10.

16 David S. Walonick, op.cit., p.7.

17 Elizabeth Loftus (1975) ‘Leading Questions and the Eyewitness Report.’ Cognitive Psychology, 1975 (7), pp. 550 – 572.

18 Elizabeth Loftus, op.cit., p. 2.

19 The lack of objectivity is more widely acknowledged in the social sciences: “But today we all know that objectivity in qualitative research is a myth.” Juliet Corbin and Anselm Strauss (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research (Thousand Oaks, CA, New Delhi, London and Singapore: Sage Publications Ltd.) p. 32. The status of quantitative data over qualitative data is questioned in the social sciences e.g. “But should quantitative accounts be given this status?” Alan Bryman and Robert G. Burgess (1994) Analyzing Qualitative Data (London and New York: Routledge) p. 50.

20 This is being more widely acknowledged: “Physics itself, however, has demonstrated the limitations of its more conventional views. These limitations are highlighted by developments in the domains of relativity theory, quantum mechanics, the zero-point field, dissipative structures, chaos, and complexity. We, therefore, recognize the shortcomings of the earlier physical views that several contemporary disciplines still use as templates for sound scientific thinking and practice.” William Braud and Rosemarie Anderson (1998) Transpersonal Research Methods for the Social Sciences (Thousand Oaks, CA, London and New Delhi: Sage Publications Ltd.) pp. 13 – 16.

21 E.g. Allan Megilll (ed.) (1994) Rethinking Objectivity (London: Duke University Press).

22 E.g. Melford E. Spiro (2006) ‘Postmodernist Anthropology, Subjectivity, and Science: A Modernist Critique.’ In Henrietta L. Moore and Todd Sanders (eds.) (2006) Anthropology in Theory. Issues in Epistemology (Malden, MA, Oxford and Victoria: Blackwell Publishing) pp.523 – 535. It was originally published in Comparative Studies in Society and History, 1996, October, 38 (4), pp. 759 – 780.

23 E.g. Roy D’Andrade (2006) ‘Moral Models in Anthropology.’ In Henrietta L. Moore and Todd Sanders (eds.) (2006) Anthropology in Theory. Issues in Epistemology (Malden, MA, Oxford and Victoria: Blackwell Publishing) pp.513 – 522. This was originally published in Current Anthropology 36 (3) (1995), pp. 399 – 406.

24 E.g. Renato Rosaldo (1989) Culture and truth: The remaking of social analysis (Boston, MA: Beacon Press).

25 The spectrum is well described (and rejected) by Melford E. Spiro, op.cit.

26 Paul Rabinow and William M. Sullivan (1987) ‘The Interpretative Turn: A Second Look.’ In Paul Rabinow and William M. Sullivan (eds.) Interpretative Social Science: A Second Look (Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press) p. 9.

27 Vide: Michio Kaku (1999) Introduction to Superstring and M-Theory (2nd edition) (New York: Springer-Verlag).

28 “The act of thinking is an act of modal transformation from the constative to the subjunctive. From the singular to the multiple. From the necessary to the contingent.” Paul Rabinow (2003) Anthropos today: Reflections on modern equipment (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) p.19.

29 Husserl called the process epoché from the Greek ἐποχή meaning ‘suspension’. Vide: Edmund Husserl (1982 but first published in French in 1913) Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy — First Book: General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology, trans. F. Kersten (The Hague: Nijhoff).

30 The word ‘phenomenon’ – φαινόμενoν – comes from the Greek word ‘phainomai’ – φαίνομαι – ‘I appear”.

31 E.g. John Van Maanen (1996) ‘Ethnography.’ In: Adam Kuper and Jessica Kuper (eds.) The Social Science Encyclopedia (2nd edition) (London: Routledge) pp. 263 – 265.

32 Bronislaw Malinowski (1987) A Diary in the Strict Sense of the Term (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).

33 “Can one have access to truth without putting into question the very being of the subject who achieves that access? Can one have access to truth without paying the price of a sacrifice, of an asceticism, of a transformation, of a purification, that touches the very being of the subject?” Paul Rabinow (2003) Anthropos today: Reflections on modern equipment (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) p. 7.