On the basis of your reading of Becker’s classic pieces on the question of what

On the basis of your reading of Becker’s classic pieces on the question of what a “crock” is, and the larger one of “whose side we are on” as we conduct social research, reflect on the issue of how we might reasonably achieve a disinterested understanding of the perspectives of our interlocutors, and whether or not espousing our interlocutors’ particular interests or goals might sacrifice or enhance an appreciation of the social realities we investigate. In addressing this issue:
1. Consider the following questions:
o Whose “side” do you think Becker favoured in his article, “How I Learned What a Crock Was?”
o How do you think the medical students would respond to reading his article? How do you think the patients would respond?
o What parallels do you draw with research in the area of criminology?
2. Discuss some arguments for or against advocacy in social research, and provide two or three concrete examples of social domains where advocacy is, or may conceivably be, used. ***(your reponse should be roughly 500 words in length)
Based on the Emerson and Pollner reading, prepare a list of three possible examples of “inclusive overtures” with which a fieldworker might be presented over the course of research, and of the ways in which these “inclusive overtures” might be handled. In discussing three examples, be sure to include some consideration of:
· How and to what extent “inclusive overtures” might constitute an opportunity to acquire richer data, and
· How and in what way “inclusive overtures” might present a challenge to the integrity of the study, or even infringe on the ethical obligations of a researcher. ***(your reponse should be roughly 500 words in length)
Based on both of the above readings, probe your own feelings regarding the question of whether, and to what extent, your existential givens condition your relationships with people who are different from you or affect the way you can relate to and understand them. In turn, as a budding social researcher, do you think these existential givens might influence the research process? If yes, how so? Provide examples that illustrate how your existential givens may determine key elements of your positionality, and therefore what it is possible for you to understand or not. Be sure to reflect on the possible implications of this interplay.
Also, are there topics, questions, or communities that may be easier or more difficult for you to approach, and how so? Conversely, do you think that existential givens are not determinative of what kind of research you can conduct, and would not, or should not, limit the options of a conscientious researcher? Note that both of these perspectives have merit, and that each of them can be argued credibly. (your response should be roughly 300 words in length)