Everyday Language, Descriptive Language and Praxeological Validity Aspects of Sociological Rigor from the Perspective of the Interpretive Paradigm and Ethnomethodology

3Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This article adds two dimensions to the debate on sociological rigor. Drawing on some positions of the interpretive paradigm, we first discuss the consequences that arise for the assessment of rigor from the double relevance of language as both constituent of the object and medium of sociological description. Rigorous research needs to position itself in relation to this double relevance and implement this position consistently. Secondly, we suggest the ethnomethodological concept of praxeological validity as a further principle of rigor. Praxeological validity emerges when the procedures that produce social phenomena are identified and described in such way that they reproduce the phenomena when implemented. Praxeological validity thus allows sociologists to validate the adequacy of their descriptions by reference to the object itself.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Meier Zu Verl, C., Meyer, C., & Oberzaucher, F. (2023). Everyday Language, Descriptive Language and Praxeological Validity Aspects of Sociological Rigor from the Perspective of the Interpretive Paradigm and Ethnomethodology. Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie, 52(1), 50–66. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-2023-2002

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free