Disclaimers
Chapter 4 in Thesis – On the Universal Meaning and Significance of Spirituality –
Before anything else, there are some important notes to make about the nature and style of this paper, to adjust the expectations of the reader. The reason I choose to say this here, and not in the methods section, is because it is relevant to the introduction leading up to the methods section.
A Philosophical Paper – The first note is that this is a philosophical rather than a theoretical paper. A theoretical paper generally reviews a great deal of literature and attempts to connect the dots to draw out overarching conclusions. A philosophical paper may also ground itself in literature such as I have, yet it uses that literature to argue for ideas that may extend beyond what can be derived from connecting the dots of the literature. This paper indeed engages in such a process of reasoning from the evidence to argue for new ideas and so it is philosophical in nature.
Research Question – It has been noted that the research question is formulated as a normative question as opposed to an objective question. That is, it is inquiring what “should be” as opposed to what “is” as we can see here “ – Should Spirituality be Considered a Universal and Vital Dimension of Human Life? -”. It is important to emphasize that while the question may be phrased as a normative question, this is not a normative paper. That is, I will not be investigating what we should or ought to do with human spirituality, I will be investigating what spirituality is. With the reasoning and evidence pertaining to what spirituality is, I will then be able to conclude with an answer to the research question. I have framed the question as I have, because it is understood that a scientific view of the world is an ongoing conversation on what we should believe about the world according to the continual process of reasoning and evidence. This paper is then my contribution to the question of what we should believe about spirituality. In the discussion section however, I will go more deeply into the potential implications for what we should or ought to do. Therefore, the discussion may have a more normative bent.
Subjective Style – In terms of style, this paper diverges from traditional academic papers. The style I have chosen for this paper is to include myself and my thinking process as well as subjective pronouns. I have chosen to include the subjective element, because it is my assumption that all academic papers have assumptions and have biases to their process, and because I intend to be as explicit and transparent as possible about mine. I believe that the reader will get a clearer understanding of the conclusion if they are also aware of the assumptions and potential biases to the process behind these conclusions. In terms of language, an academic paper will not say “I have found” or “We will see”, it will rather use objective language such as “this paper has found” or “as will be seen”. I choose to use subjective language because it is consistent with the overall subjective style in which this paper is written. The fact that I have chosen a subjective style is not to say that I will not value objectivity in this thesis. Objectivity in evidence reasoning will be valued throughout this paper, and I have aimed to base myself on the highest possible quality of literature, drawing as much as possible from the biggest thinkers and greatest works in the relevant fields. However, this literature will inevitably be interpreted in different ways depending on the assumptions and biases to the process of the paper that incorporates them, as they will in any other paper, and especially in philosophical papers. For this reason, I am including the subjective element in addition to an emphasis on objectivity, not instead of it, for the best possible overall outcome.
Statement of Personal Bias – As a first note and in the spirit of transparency, I will open this thesis by acknowledging my most significant personal biases in relation to this thesis. I, the author, have personally had my life changed by various spiritual practices, creating a bias to believe that spirituality should be considered a vital dimension of life. Moreover, I have had the experiences of a successful integration of various spiritual practices from different traditions in my personal life, creating a bias to believe that there is a universal reality underlying spirituality. Although I have done my best to take an objective approach and ground myself in objective evidence, my personal experience has undoubtedly steered by thinking in the process of writing this thesis, and this should be considered by the reader. However, the reader should of course also consider the evidence and the arguments on their own merits.
I have chosen this style and stated my personal bias not just because I think it is right for my own paper, but because I believe it should become a standard practice in academic papers to have a section stating the most relevant personal biases. Hopefully this will inspire others to do the same, and help combat the taboo on having inevitable person biases in the academy.
With those remarks we may open the paper.
Author – Sagi Andersen