Important Concepts in Phenomenology
47
Researcher task is “to transform lived experience into a textual expression” thus the reader can identify him herself to the lived experience van Manen,
1990, 36. The textual expression shou ld be delivered “in such a way that the
effect of the text is at once a reflexive re-living and a reflective appropriation of something meaningful: a notion by which a reader is powerfully animated in his
or her own l ived experience” van Manen, 36.
8 Meaning
Meaning or essence is the final destination of phenomenological study. It is defined by Husserl 1931, as paraphrased by Moustakas 1994, as a thing “which
is common or universal, the condition or quality without which a thing would not be what is” 100. Similar to Moustakas, van Manen defined it as “the very nature
of a phenomenon, for that which makes a some- “thing” what it is” 1990, 10. In
other words, meaning can be defined as what a thing is universally. As quoted by Moustakas 1994, Sartre
defines essence as “the „concatenation of appearances‟ xlvi” 100. It „is “radically severed from the individual
appearance which manifests it, since on principle it is that which must be able to be manifested by an infinite series of individual manifes
tations‟ xlviii” Moustakas, 100. If paraphrased, essence can thus be considered as a reference
which is manifested through series of individual appearances. Moustakas 1994 also writes that “essences of any experience are never totally
exhausted” 100. Further, he writes, “the fundamental textural-structural synthesis represents the essences at a particular time and place from vantage point
of an individual researcher following an exhaustive imaginative and reflective PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
48
study of the phenomenon” 100. Essences for Moustakas can thus be concluded as a thing which always moves depending on the context time and place.
From all of those definitions on meaning and essence it can thus be concluded that meaning or essence is what a thing is universally; it is manifested through
series of individual appearances and is always changed depending on the context. According to Betti 1967, 1980, as stated by Alvesson Sköldberg 2000, what
are important when dealing with meaning in hermeneutics are coherence and correspondence.
In order to reach meaning coherence, researchers must turn their attention to “hermeneutic circle of part-whole” Alvesson
Sköldberg, 2000, 67
.
The researchers are given privilege to decide which elements in the research are part
and which elements are whole. However, Alvesson Sköldberg writes, the part
may refer to “a word in a text, a clause, a sentence, a paragraph, or a section” 67. Meanwhile, the whole “may be the text, the author behind the work, the historical
background” Alvesson Sköldberg
,
67. By theorists of historiography, this canon is applied through what is called as criticism of bias Alvesson
Sköldberg. Bias is defined as “the interest conscious or not of the informant in skewing the information” Alvesson
Sköldberg, 72. If bias is strongly indicated, the value of the information becomes lessen.
Meaning correspondence can be acquired if researchers are able to establish “a kind of „resonance‟ with the object of the investigation, a „congeniality‟ by which
an invisible bond of meaning is forged between them” Alvesson Sköldberg,
2000, 69. In order to reach meaning correspondence, historiography theorists suggest researchers to implement what they call Verstehen or empathy
Alvesson
49
Sköldberg, 2000. More detailed elaboration of this sub subchapter is put under the discussion of Empathy below.
9 Empathy
As stated previously, empathy is the application of meaning correspondence, the fourth hermeneutic canon proposed by Betti Alvesson Sköldberg, 2000.
Since this study is hermeneutic phenomenology, the elaboration of empathy by Betti is considered relevant to be summarized in this subchapter.
Empathy is defined as “the intuitive understanding „from within‟ of the object of investigation, whether the latter is a single individual or overarching social
formations” Alvesson
Sköldberg
, 2000, 75. Alvesson
Sköldberg
describe at least two significances of empathy in hermeneutics. The first significance is
related to the capability of empathy to cover the less value of the source. Other than empathy, the historiography theorists proposed authenticity, bias, and also
distance and dependence as the application of the four canons. The more insufficient the three aspects are, the lesser the source is valued. If the other three
aspects show that the value of the source is unsound, empathy can be used as the last tool to check whether or not the information from the source useable. Another
significance of empathy is related to its ability to reveal the inner meaning from the subjects Collingwood, 1992, as paraphrased in Alvesson
Sköldberg, 2000
.
10 Reflection
Husserl defines reflection as “the process of analyzing and grasping “stream of experience ... in the light of its o
wn evidence” Husserl, 1931, 419 as quoted by Moustakas, 1994,
47. Evidence itself is defined as “something that shows itself – PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
50
something that is t here before one” Moustakas, 47. Reflection “provides a
logical, systematic, and coherent resource for carrying out the analysis and synthesis needed to arrive at essential descriptions of e
xperience” Moustakas, 47. Radical reflection “begins by „rendering explicit the universal
„presupposition‟ which underlies all our life‟” Gurwitsch, 1966, 419 as quoted by Moustakas, 47. Reflection has two focuses. The first focus is self while another
focus is context. These two focuses are reflected in the following discussions on reflection.
Alvesson Sköldberg 2000 state that reflection “turns attention „inwards‟
towards the person of the r esearcher” 5. It is related with “what one is doing”
Alvesson Sköldberg, 245. When reflecting, we contemplate “the premises for
our thoughts, our observations, and our use of language” Alvesson Sköldberg, 245. Steier argues that reflection is all about construction and in construction, the
constructing subject the researcher plays significant role Alvesson Sköldberg. It also considers language and narrative as the form of interpretation
in the research context important Alvesson Sköldberg. These discussions emphasize the importance of self-involvelment.
Alvesson Sköldberg 2000 also mention the importance of
“the relevant research community, society, and intellectual and cultural traditions” as another
part of reflection 245. Reflection is the investigation of “the way in which
theoretical, cultural, and political context of individual and intellectual involvement affects interaction with whatever is being researched” Alvesson
Sköldberg, 245. These discussions show the relevance of context to reflection. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
51
11 Theme
Theme is “structure of experience” van Manen, 1990, 79. It is “an element motif, formula, or device which occurs frequen
tly in the text” van Manen, 78. It is something which builds meaning. It is meaning units, structure of meaning
van Manen. In order to grasp the meaning of certain lived experience thus, it is important to
observe its themes van Manen. This is why theme “gives control and order to our resea
rch and writing” van Manen, 79.