Paley John
University of Worcester, Worcester, UK.
Nurs Philos. 2018 Jul;19(3):e12212. doi: 10.1111/nup.12212. Epub 2018 Apr 11.
Amedeo Giorgi has published a review article devoted to Phenomenology as Qualitative Research: A Critical Analysis of Meaning Attribution. However, anyone reading this article, but unfamiliar with the book, will get a distorted view of what it is about, whom it is addressed to, what it seeks to achieve and how it goes about presenting its arguments. Not mildly distorted, in need of the odd correction here and there, but systematically misrepresented. The article is a study in misreading. Giorgi misreads the book's mise en scène; he misreads its narrative arc; he misreads individual arguments; he misreads short, simple passages; he misreads the philosophy of the science literature; he misreads his own data; he misreads the title; he misreads the blurb; he misreads the acknowledgements. In addition, there are serious failures of scholarship (ironically, he demonstrates how unacquainted he is with the relevant literature at the very moment he is accusing me of being ill-informed). In this reply, I provide several examples of these errors, but my primary aim is to understand why Giorgi's misreading is as ubiquitous as it is. To this end, I explain his mistakes by reference to the hermetic epistemology within which he is confined.
阿梅代奥·乔吉发表了一篇综述文章，主题是“作为质性研究的现象学：意义归因的批判性分析”。然而，任何读过这篇文章但不熟悉该书的人，都会对这本书的内容、受众、目标以及论证方式产生扭曲的看法。不是轻微的扭曲，偶尔需要这里那里修正一下，而是系统性的歪曲。这篇文章就是一篇误读研究。乔吉误读了该书的场景设置；他误读了其叙事脉络；他误读了个别论点；他误读了简短、简单的段落；他误读了科学文献哲学；他误读了自己的数据；他误读了标题；他误读了内容简介；他误读了致谢。此外，还存在严重的学术失误（具有讽刺意味的是，就在他指责我消息不灵通的那一刻，他展示了自己对相关文献是多么不了解）。在这篇回应中，我给出了这些错误的几个例子，但我的主要目的是理解为什么乔吉的误读如此普遍。为此，我通过参考他所局限的封闭认识论来解释他的错误。
