Michael Sylvester wrote:
> -Go ahead and try to randomly select subjects in Tibet for
> Experimental and Control groups.
Why not?
The Tibetans I know (and, as a Tibetan Buddhist who has been to Tibet and
Nepal [where the Dalai Lama presides in exile] a couple times, I know
quite a few) are certainly not individuals who would object to
participation in such experiments. The Dalai Lama himself has encouraged
his people to learn Western Science--and to expand their knowledge of the
physical world by incorporating scientific principles into traditional
systems--see his lectures at the Harvard East-West symposium in 1991.
> -Informed consent,huh. They may think that you are working
> for the Chilean secret police or the CIA.
Er, Michael.
Chile is a rather long distance from Tibet and has no economic interests
there, while the CIA represents the intelligence arm of a nation the
traditional Tibetan government and religious leaders have allied
themselves with. I doubt the former would be present (actually, since
Chile doesn't _have_ a "secret police" it would be pretty difficult for
_them_ to be there anyway) and while the latter almost certainly are, few
Tibetans (other than resettled Chinese) would have any fear of them.
Were you perhaps confusing China with Chile--or did you confuse the
Himalayas with the Andes?
> - And how about the problem of translation- which may not carry the
> same semantic import.
Here you have a legitimate concern.
On the other hand, the obviously solution is to work with a native
speaking scientist--something readily found in all but the most primitive
cultures--or to work with a highly skilled translator.
> -Paper- pencil responses may not be appropriate.
True.
Then again they aren't appropriate when working with quadriplegic
subjects, illiterates, or young children, either, yet that doesn't exclude
them from research considerations.
> Forget about debriefing.
Why?
> - Questionnable transfer of Eurocentric construct validity to
> different samples of populations.
Was that supposed to make any sense at all?
Michael, if you seriously believe that Western research methodology is
not appropriate to other cultures, you have a prejudice AGAINST those
cultures. What you are effectively saying is that other cultures don't
have the capability of responding rationally, predictably, and
intelligently (if they did, they would be able to participate effectively
in research, whether it was their traditional approach or not). You may
feel you are supporting their cultures with your statements, but in
reality you are putting them down as being incapable of participation in
modern society.
Of course, you may well NOT believe your own statements--but that begs
the question of why you would make such statements if you don't believe
them.
Sorry, Michael, but your position is pretty untenable.
Rick
--
Rick Adams
Department of Social Sciences
Jackson Community College
Jackson, MI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love
you leave behind when you're gone. --Fred Small, Everything Possible "
