Shannon-Interpretivism

=**Interpretivism**=

Example 1: A Spanish play/parable
This example is either a parable or play that I remember reading long ago, and it is one that I used with my students to show the importance of punctuation. I couldn't remember the author, and I came across many similar versions of the same story. I apologize that the following link is in Spanish; I couldn't find a comparable version in English. [|The importance of punctuation marks--The will]

To translate this story briefly, following the death of a man, people gathered together to read his will and distribute his inheritance. Five different people/groups were named in the will and each thought that he/she was the possible heir to the fortune. Unfortunately the man that wrote the will did not use any punctuation marks, and each potential heir interpreted the will in a way that would benefit him/herself by adding their own punctuation.

Here's an example translated, from the perspective of the nephew (sobrino): " I leave my inheritance to my nephew Juan. Not to my brother Luis. Never will I pay the debt to the tailor. Nothing for the Jesuits either. This is what I want."

And here's a different version from the brother (hermano) Luis: "Leave my inheritance to my nephew Juan? No. It's for my brother Luis! Never will I pay the debt to the tailor. Nothing for the Jesuits either. This is what I want."

These people, including the tailor and the Jesuits (who obviously also punctuated the document in their favor), brought their own perspective and ideas to the judge, hoping to have him make a decision for their benefit. The judge tried to understand each of their perspectives and make his decision accordingly. I thought this related to interpretivism in several ways. There was no clear right answer or one correct way to the inheritance to be distributed. From the general idea of the will, its author just wanted it to go to someone. The individuals/groups named in the will constructed their own understanding of the will and explained their reasoning to the judge. There were no clear facts, just individual interpretations. As written in Hatch & Yanow "meaning must be understood (or interpreted); it cannot merely be grasped" (p 66). The role of the judge was to understand each individual's ideas/perspectives after listening to their stories and make a decision that was best for the situation, similar to the leader in an organization makes decisions affecting the growth and productivity as related to the mission of the organization.

If you want to know how the story ends...here's the judge's decision and final interpretation: "Leave my inheritance to my nephew Juan? No. For my brother Luis? Not him either. Never will I pay the debt to the tailor. Nothing for the Jesuits, either. This is what I want." And since the judge couldn't reach a final decision based on his interpretation, all of the money went to the state.

Example #2: Marathon running
People have proven that successfully competing in and/or completing challenging sports is within the realm of human capability. Marathon running, for example, has been shown to be very hard on the human body both physically and mentally. Yet throughout the world thousands of people take on this challenge each year. While many view these individuals as crazy, et al., these runners have their own reasons for training for, running in, and completing such a difficult task. [|Why run marathons?] [|Why we run article]They may just be up for the personal challenge, or they may be doing it for a particular cause. They may run it in a variety of ways (slow, fast, just to finish, etc.) or for a variety of reasons, but they are all part of an elite group of runners, those that have completed 26.2 miles. Marathoning has become a big industry--from the shoes and clothes, to the training guides, to the food and beverages products. I thought the idea of the needs of the marathon runners and the industry that has developed was representative of interpretivism. The general industry of marathoning has taken a look at individual needs and changed its products and suggestions to meet the needs of a wide variety of runners. The culture of these runners (and the developed subcultures) has to be examined closely as the each have developed their own understanding of what it means to run a marathon and what they need to complete the marathon. The elite runners obviously have very different perspectives and experiences from those of the more casual, beginning runner. These varied perspectives play a major role on the marketing and product development of the companies and organizations related to marathon running, as well as the needs of the individual runner. While certain needs of the runner may be objective (some training, food, etc.), most of the needs are variable and subjective (you don't have to wear particular, or even any shoes or use the running gels or drinks to be successful).[|Marathon products] While researchers can develop various products and guides, the runners themselves really contribute to the development of the industry. Dryzek, Schneider and Ingram were quoted in the Hatch &Yanow article "an interpretive approach...accords the status of expertise to to local knowledge possessed by situational actors, not just to the technical expertise of researchers" (p. 70).

Return to Interpretivism