The Philosophy of Scientific Research in Economic Sciences

Abstract

This paper addresses the importance of understanding the philosophy of scientific research, which in turn guides the selection of the most appropriate research methodology in terms of data collection, analysis methods, and deriving conclusions. Depending on the researcher’s philosophical stance and adopted intellectual paradigm, one may choose a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods approach. Quantitative research is characterized by objectivity and the pursuit of neutrality, aligning with the positivist philosophy. In contrast, qualitative research emphasizes subjectivity and direct interaction with participants to understand meanings within their contexts, which is consistent with interpretivist, constructivist, and phenomenological philosophies. Pragmatism, on the other hand, offers a flexible philosophical framework that supports selecting the most suitable methodology according to the research question, transcending the traditional dichotomy between quantitative and qualitative approaches, and emphasizing the practical value of knowledge.

The paper further highlights the differences between objectivity-which views social phenomena as independent realities—and subjectivity, which perceives social reality as an interactive construct based on individual perceptions. It also underscores the value of methodological triangulation in mixed-methods research, which combines quantitative and qualitative techniques to enhance the reliability of findings and reduce bias. This makes the mixed-methods approach an optimal choice for addressing the complexities of social reality. Additionally, the paper reviews various philosophical paradigms, such as the interpretivist, post-positivist, and realist models, explaining how each supports mixed-methods research within its philosophical context.

In conclusion, the study emphasizes the importance of alignment between the researcher’s philosophical orientation and the research question, asserting that methodological pluralism enhances the accuracy and comprehensiveness of scientific results.