Paradigms and presuppositions: the difference between qualitative and quantitative research.

The difference between qualitative and quantitative approaches to research is often said to be grounded in two distinct paradigms, each with its own, mutually contradictory, philosophical presuppositions. Quantitative research, the argument goes, presupposes objective truths and a singular, unequivocal reality; qualitative research presupposes a world which is inherently subjective, with no unequivocal reality. In this article, I try to show that the 'paradigm' interpretation of the difference between quantitative and qualitative research comes very close to being incoherent, since it either slides into extreme relativism or ends up contradicting itself. I argue, instead, that qualitative methods and quantitative methods are simply tools, fit for a range of scientific purposes. In common with other tools, whether maps or cutlery, they are useful in different types of situations; and it is rather strange to think that they have philosophical presuppositions 'built into' them. I illustrate this idea by comparing motorway maps with surveys and Ordnance Survey maps with ethnography. The article concludes by proposing an explanation of why it is tempting to argue in favour of the 'paradigm' interpretation, but also suggests that this is the wrong strategy.