In this article, I focus on two ways of conceptualizing validity and validation, by using reductionist and (e)pistemological approaches, respectively. I question some common understandings of reductionist validation and describe an (e)pistemological standpoint that provides an alternative to reductionist views. In addition, I argue that validity and validation, as concepts, are tools rather than reflections of truth. Furthermore, fallibility, which is embedded in all views of validity and validation, can be compensated with pluralism, as well as acceptance, coexistence, and collaboration with the Other.
展开▼
