BerandaIntroduction
The following discussion analyzes the manner in which knowledge is obtained through personal experiences, tradition, authority, and intuition within the discipline of Criminal Justice. The goal of this discussion is to examine the epistemology associated with the development of knowledge in addition to identifying the various strengths and limitations evident in relation to this field of study.
Personal Experience
Personal experience in relation to obtaining knowledge requires comprehension, awareness, and appreciation within one’s particular area of expertise. This professional responsiveness is subjective, pertaining to the interests of each particular individual, and may be obtained in a variety of ways. According to Capers (1978), personal knowledge is ultimately conditioned and at times assembled based upon the level of empirical proficiency from various sources of literature that one is able to familiarize themselves with, in correlation to their particular discipline (as cited by Berragan, 1998).
Moch (1990) noted that the components comprised in obtaining personal knowledge include that of experiential, interpersonal, and intuitive realization (as cited by Berragan, 1998). In other words, personal knowledge within a given discipline may be examined and identified with experience from a previous occasion; however, methodical examination of knowledge purports that personal knowledge may be obtained through social interaction and experiences engaging personal and professional relationships. The final component that Moch incorporated into the examination of how personal knowledge is ultimately obtained is derived from one’s own intuition. Researchers concur that a certain level of intuition is required to be able to fully comprehend knowledge gained and relate it to personal experience in a time of reflection and conditioning.
Strengths and Weaknesses
In relation to personal experience, one issue that may also be interpreted as a strength or possibly a weakness in some cases, is that of interrelationships. Individuals who may have plenty of credentials to perform a particular task within law enforcement may also lack substantial hands on experience. In relation to knowledge, interpersonal experience may be construed as more significant in relation to one’s level of knowledge versus that of other competitive standards.
The individual that is able to offer more interpersonal experience may be perceived as one of containing a higher level of intuition and therefore would be more of an asset to the department. However, it is worth notating that within the field of criminal justice, one’s intuition may be scrutinized and possibly identified as a form of discretionary bias which can be an unattractive quality associated with the acquisition of knowledge. Accompanied with any level of personal experience is the issue of misrepresentation. The personal experience of an individual can falsify an event or misdirect an interpretation based on the issue of subjective interpretation (Neuman, 2006).
Tradition
The examination of knowledge in and of itself that is obtained within the specialty of criminal justice, combines several factors pertaining to the theoretical aspects of this field of study in addition to the foundational elements of criminology. Therefore, it is realistic to recognize the traditional element that is associated with acquiring knowledge and the ability to associate the innovative processes of learning with the traditional aspects of this discipline. When typically relying upon the traditional methodology associated with knowledge, one may naturally assume that the methods that have been previously established and prove to be functional, are not worthy of modification (Neuman, 2006).
Strengths and Weaknesses
In relation to the possible strengths or weaknesses that traditional knowledge may embody within the criminal justice system is the affair of whether or not members of the younger generation are able to comply with traditional standards of operation and whether or not members of the older generation are able to adjust to new technological applications and procedures that are necessary to effectively operate within today’s society. In relation to policing, traditional standards may adhere to systematic formations of procedures that may be interpreted as racial profiling. Neuman (2006) addresses the issue of prejudice prevalent within the spectrum of traditional social knowledge.
Erroneous assumptions in relation to procedure and methodology pertaining to the actions of criminal justice professionals are most definitely affected by the various traditional beliefs that are the basis of the foundation in criminological theory. As a result, criminological theories are consistently evaluated and modified as they are compared to traditional standards and the theoretical implications that support criminal justice procedure (Akers & Sellers, 2009).
Authority
It is evident that knowledge is gained from personal experience as well as from that of traditional standards that have been utilized due to logical and efficient functioning; however, knowledge is also gained from those in authoritative positions for a variety of reasons. It is natural to assume that those in authority have experience and knowledge to earn that position, or they would not probably hold that particular role. For example, within the realm of criminal justice, one may deduce that the Chief of Police would be cross trained in every category possible, providing knowledge, expertise, and practical advice for any situation that may arise.
One may also conclude that when a departmental procedure or sting operation fails to meet the expectations as originally planned, the individual in authority will be held accountable for the level of knowledge they are assumed to have in relation to preparing for success within the police force. With that being said, prior experience within the field of law enforcement does provide a certain amount of legitimate influence and opportunity for an individual to earn respect within the criminal justice system and therefore warrants authority based upon the exposure to policing and the knowledge gained.
Strengths and Weaknesses
According to Neuman (2006) there are weaknesses associated to the level of authority that one may hold. These weaknesses include the issue of trusting and believing one’s knowledge based upon their level of proficiency and authority within a certain area, even if there is a lack of sufficient knowledge in a particular area (Neuman, 2006). Another example of a weakness pertaining to those in authority centers on the fact that those in authority subsume themselves to be knowledgeable in subjects in which they may not necessarily have the appropriated expertise as they are perceived to encompass (Neuman, 2006).
Intuition
There is much controversy pertaining to the concept of intuition in relation to knowledge obtained. Due to the fact that intuition entails a heightened level of processing information without consciously using the tool of reasoning (Bowers, et al., 1990), it is typically deduced as an unreasonable technique that is not affiliated with the scientific model implemented in the examination of how one attains knowledge (as cited by Eisengart & Faiver, 1996).
Intuition may be credited at times for judgment executed by professionals. This judgment or intuition may provide substantial bearings (Brenner & Tanner, 1987) in relation to an individual’s level of knowledge (as cited by Welsh & Lyons, 2001). However, this concept may be challenged as English (1993) argues that it is unacceptable for individual’s to credit intuition as a basis for being an expert (as cited by Welsh & Lyons, 2001).
Strengths and Weaknesses
In relation to the strengths and weaknesses of knowledge obtained being credited to that of mere intuition, intuition examines the chance circumstances associated with knowledge and experience versus the scientific credibility of one’s methodology (Eisengart & Faiver, 1996). In relation to the field of criminal justice, intuition can be a dangerous aspect to consider when the department’s reputation is on the line or even when certain circumstances place you in harm’s way.
A hunch in the field may cause a life to be taken, a department to be placed under extreme scrutiny, the wrong suspect to be charged or convicted, as well as the possibility of substantial damage of evidence discovered to be considered for dismissal due to unethical retrieval methods. However, intuition at times within the field of criminal justice may be respected as well as acknowledged as quick rationalization, and can be perceived as a form of respect for how knowledgeable and professional one may be in the recognition of their actions.
Conclusion
In summation, epistemology is the study of how an individual is able to acquire knowledge. This discussion considered the nature and application of acquiring knowledge to that of the field of criminal justice. There are various methods utilized in obtaining knowledge that include: personal experience, traditional and theoretical aspects of methods, authoritative reverence, and intuitive esteem. It is evident that the process of acquiring knowledge tends to be rather subjective in nature due to the fact that each individual learns differently and is ultimately able to amass together more conceptualizations than one in relation to knowledge that is previously learned as well as information that is presented within a new context.
References:
Akers, R.L., & Sellers, C.S. (2009). Criminological theories: Introduction, evaluation, and application. (5th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Berragan, L. (1998, May). Nursing practice draws upon several different ways of knowing. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 7(3), 209-217. Retrieved January 6, 2009, from Academic Search Premier Database.
Eisengart, S., & Faiver, C. (1996, January). Intuition in mental health counseling. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 18(1), 41. Retrieved January 7, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.
Neuman, W. L. (2006). Science and research. In N. L. Neuman, Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Welsh, I., & Lyons, C. M. (2001). Evidence-based care and the case for intuition and tacit knowledge in clinical assessment and decision making in mental health nursing practice: An empirical contribution to the debate. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 8(4), 299-305.
0 comments:
Post a Comment