Introduction: the conception and reception of Marginal Comment [author's MS] (original) (raw)

Commentary on commentaries: A space for dialogue among different perspectives

In this commentary we discuss our reactions towards the six contributions on our article "The psychotherapist's social role under a dialogical perspective: A study of the personal construction of «I as psychotherapist»" (in this issue). These commentaries discuss a multiplicity of problems and potentials, providing us with a meaningful space for dialogue among our multiple and sometimes discrepant perspectives. We have organized our reaction around three issues: (1) the importance of context influence on the process of being a psychotherapist; (2) the use of the motives as a tool to organize the psychotherapists' diversity; and (3) the methodology for studying the dialogical processes.

Introduction: working with paradata, marginalia and fieldnotes

Working with Paradata, Marginalia and Fieldnotes, 2000

While research areas do not just 'appear', the genesis of academic interests and specialities is neither straightforward nor always clear. How we come to be interested in specific areas is often tied up with individual research histories, career trajectories or even chance discoveries and accidental encounters. It may also be the case that while we may think we are working in niche or even obscure fields of enquiry sometimes serendipitous meetings, conversations or exchanges reveal shared interests, common ground and opportunities for future productive collaborations. Indeed, this volume, like many others, has origins in niche areas, chance discoveries and fortuitous encounters. Its roots lie in two separate sets of joint research experiences coming together to form a shared interest for the four editors in what is a burgeoning and emergent field. That interest is in research that treats the by-products of an activity as data and of research interest in itself: paradata, marginalia and fieldnotes. Yet how did we get here? Ros Edwards' interest in by-products was sparked by listening to survey methodologists who were co-members of the ESRC National Centre for Research Methods (NCRM), discussing the 'paradata' created by delivering surveys (for example Turner et al., 2014). Her colleagues' reference to the useful information that could be gained by analysis of keystrokes and other electronic aspects of computer-aided surveys, prompted Ros to realise that the notes scribbled by fieldworkers on the paper copies of Peter Townsend's old poverty survey booklets (from the 1967-68 Poverty in the UK Study) that she had spotted stored in the basement of a data archive could also be considered useful paradata. Chatting about this material with Ann Phoenix, whose Novella narrative analysis project was attached to the NCRM, together they conceived a project that investigated the possibilities for analysing the interviewer notes. This was the start of a fascination

Introduction: Reflection on/as Supplement

Law and Critique, 2021

This is the Introduction to a forthcoming special issue of Law and Critique entitled 'Dangerous Supplements: The Work and Significance of Peter Fitzpatrick'. Peter Fitzpatrick was one of the most influential and revered of legal theorists in the English-speaking world. Best known for his work, The Mythology of Modern Law (1992), and his book, Modernism and the Grounds of Law (2001), Peter’s written work spanned and influenced the fields not just of critical legal theory but also of law and colonialism, law and anthropology, postcolonial legal studies, law and society, law and the humanities, international law, and countless other disciplines and sub-disciplines of legal study. His non-written work, his supervision and mentoring of junior scholars and Ph.D. students and his creation of intellectual communities from Queensland to Kent to London and across the world, was and will remain legendary—and attests not only to the intellectual influence of his scholarship but to the special qualities of the man who produced it.

Epilogue : Summarizing the argumentation

2020

This book extends debates in the field of biographical research, arguing that causal explanations are not at odds with biographical research and that biographical research is in fact a valuable tool for explaining why things in social and personal lives are one way and not another. Bringing reconstructive biographical research into dialogue with critical realism, it explains how and why relational social ontology can become a unique theoretical ground for tapping emergent mechanisms and latent meaning structures. Through an account of the reasons for which reductionist epistemologies, rational action models and covering law explanations are not appropriate for biographical research, the authors develop the philosophical idea of singular causation as a means by which biographical researchers are able to forge causal hypotheses for the occurrence of events and offer guidance on the application of this methodological principle to concrete, empirical examples. As such, this volume will appeal to scholars across the social sciences with interests in biographical research and social research methods.