نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار. گروه فقه مضاف دانشگاه باقرالعلوم، قم، ایران
2 گروه ارتباطات فرهنگی دانشگاه علوم اجتماعی و رفتاری دانشگاه باقرالعلوم، قم. ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
In recent decades, various quantitative and qualitative research methods have been among the major drivers of knowledge production in many academic circles. The emphasis placed on these methods has progressed to such an extent that they have been elevated beyond their instrumental role and transformed into normative criteria for assessing scientific validity, research, and researchers. In other words, the scientific and research value of a study has come to be determined not by its content and the logic underlying its production, but by its use of one of the recognized quantitative or qualitative research methods. The present article adopts an analytical-critical approach to examine this shift from ends to means as one of the fundamental challenges in the field of knowledge production. Drawing on an analytical review of the literature and the history of the philosophy of science, the sociology of science, and science policy, and by distinguishing between “understanding” and “science,” the study demonstrates that the excessive prioritization of method not only restricts scientific creativity and innovation, but also distances science from addressing real societal problems and contributes to phenomena such as the formalization of research, the weakening of indigenous theorization, and academic rent-seeking. The article argues that science governance requires a reconsideration of the logic of knowledge production and a transition from method-centered hegemony toward a problem-centered and understanding-oriented model in which methods serve the research problem rather than the other way around. Finally, the study presents policy implications of this approach for scientific evaluation systems, research journals, and graduate education.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)