lau, tu maacies filozoofiju, man tev jautaajums, bet es origjinaali rakstiiju sngliski so man slinkums tulkot:

I was wondering.. and it really doesn't make any sense. How can researchers in a social constructivism paradigm use triangulation to check 'the validity and reliability' of their research if, by definition, within that paradigm there is NO objective, valid reality. If the constructed realities differ even for different researchers, what essentially are they testing by triangulation? Which validity I mean, because how can one think about validity if the paradigm assumes there is no universal validity, there are only multiple realities? I think that basically they are just comparing whether they have the same constructed realities, but what has that got to do with the research? Is it more valid if it fits the realities of more researchers.. Doesn't make sense...