Authenticity

Conceptual Overview and Discussion

Sartre's juxtaposition of subjectivity and objective reality underscores the feminist, postcolonial, and postmodern critique of objectivity. For Sartre, authenticity is the opposite of bad faith and refers to the alignment of subjective consciousness (i.e., pour-soi) with its objective reality (i.e., en-soi). One implication of this dualism and the problem of bad faith is that all knowledge is biased. This question has been taken up by the postpositivists (e.g., feminist, postmodern, postcolonial, queer theorists) in their critique of positivism.

The postpositivist argument is that from within the positivist paradigm, researchers (i.e., the subject) are required to study human phenomena (i.e., the object) objectively. Objectivity is possible only when researchers approach the object(s) of their research with impartiality and with dispassion so as to avoid contaminating it and thus to minimize and hopefully eliminate bias. This, the postpositivists argue, is impossible because objective reality and the subject are always in the process of becoming and can never be apprehended other than through preconceived and always partial frameworks or paradigms. Therefore, all research is contaminated by researcher subjectivity and what comes to be accepted as true is merely that which is accepted as such by tradition or authority.

Given the hierarchical basis of tradition and authority, all subjectivities and by extension all research serves some, usually dominant (e.g., male, modernism, imperialism, heterosexism) as opposed to other, often subordinate (e.g., female, Islamic or Christian fundamentalists, indigenous peoples, homosexuals) interests. Further, the objectivity parameter is morally indefensible because it preempts and silences these alternative voices. If no one subjectivity can claim ultimate truth, then all subjectivities are equal; thus, the voices not only of the researcher but also those of the researched must be collected, analyzed, and interpreted. This leads to the criterion of reflexivity.

Finally, if no one voice can be privileged and all voices are biased, then truth is always conditional and can emerge only through mutual interrogation and consensus in situ. This leads researchers to adopt a participatory action-based approach. Among case study and qualitative researchers, the question of authenticity is an important concept that leads to the debate on validity and how to collect and assess trustworthy data as well as their interpretation.

Contemporary researchers have solved this dilemma in a number of interesting ways. Egon Guba and Yvonna Lincoln, for example, argue that the question of validity is by definition one of authenticity and have identified five criteria: fairness, ontological authenticity, educative authenticity, catalytic authenticity, and tactical authenticity. Fairness refers to the necessity that there should be a balance of voices such that all contributors to the research project are heard. Ontological and educative authenticity refer to the necessity of raising awareness among participants in and those affected by the research. Catalytic and tactical authenticities refer to the prompting by the research of interest-based action among research participants and the involvement of the researcher in educating them, if it is so desired, for political action, and the furthering of positive social change.

...