Starting points and destinations: negotiating factual and fictional pathways: a response to Gilbourne,Jones and Jordan

This paper provides a response to questions which emerged when reading Gilbourne et al's paper, questions it is suggested which compel us to go back to the very heart of what critical social science is (or can be) about. Central to this debate is the extent to which a perceived starting point in any investigation has implications upon the directions the research may take, especially if the intention is to achieve social change. It is suggested that Gilbourne et al's strategy to create a ‘fictional’ story about an individual conflicts with their attempt to observe an empirical reality and ultimately engage in critical social science.

Although it is acknowledged that recognising subjectivity in terms of the reflexive stance of the researcher within the research process is crucial in social science, making the researcher the focus of the research does however significantly distort the possibilities for observing empirical reality.

Whilst it is also considered that fiction, personal reflection and creative processes are all essential elements in any learning process, the argument suggested in this response is that they must be contextualised within social reality. Indeed, if social reality is to be the focus for critical enquiry then legitimate attempts must be made to acknowledge the contrasting directions certain theoretical and methodological frames will lead. The suggestion is that if critical change is the main agenda, we need to identify what it is we want to change and in doing so must prioritise the social world of others.