There is an interesting piece here where it is explained that when someone brings forward an idea that would debunk one’s theory – in GT what they have brought to the table is rather:
“He has merely posed another comparative datum for generating another theoretical category or property”.
Glaser is revering to the point that:
“A sociologist can almost always find, if he wants to, some piece of data that disproves the fact on which his colleague has based a theoretical notion.”
I can really relate to this way of conceiving criticism. When my supervisors bring their concerns or ideas to the table – really I should be mapping these from this early stage as they provide a sort of view over parts of my theoretical landscape that I’m blind to.
Can I find a way to make this process more strategic? At the moment whilst my research design is only beginning, I pin key points to my pin board or write them in my ‘challenges’ part of my introspection cycle. It strikes me that I need a process for storing and considering these ‘points of data’.
Barney G. Glaser & Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. P22