LECTURE 1: THE PHENOMENOLOGICAL METHOD

The researcher realized that the phenomenological method as the intervention strategy cannot be successfully implemented during fieldwork unless the participants appreciate the method and its procedures. The researcher conducted two one and half hour lectures on the method with the participants. The purpose of the lectures was to enhance the participants’ understanding of the method through a general study of the development of philosophical phenomenology as a discipline and phenomenology of religion as a method of studying religion.

The researcher explained the development of the method by the German mathematician, Sir Edmund Husserl ((1859-1938) and the influence of pure science and philosophy upon Husserl’s phenomenological method (Cox, op. cit:15-17).

The phenomenological method was presented as a scientific method of studying phenomena with procedures that should be followed in scientific investigations in order to get a deeper understanding of the phenomena under investigation. The link between philosophical phenomenology and phenomenology of religion was discussed with

88 participants appreciating that the later borrowed heavily from the former. Cox’s nine steps of the phenomenological method were discussed (Cox, ibid:26-40). Being aware that the method and the terms it uses would be difficult for the participants to comprehend, the researcher had to simplify the concepts as much as possible. This was necessary since the success of fieldwork would largely depend on the extent to which the participants understood the method and can apply it. The following steps were discussed;

1. Suspending preconceptions, that is performing epoche

2. Interpolating new knowledge into existing knowledge with empathy

3. Maintaining neutrality that is epoche

4. Describing religious phenomena

5. Giving names to the phenomena

6. Describing the relationships and processes among the phenomena

7. Making a typical model of religious phenomena

8. Developing intuition into the meaning of religion and

9. Testing the insights.

( Adapted from Cox,ibid:26-40)

Of the nine ( 9) steps, steps 1-6 were more easily understood, though in theory. The participants appreciated the need for step 1 that is to perform epoche in order to avoid bias in any investigation. The same applies to step 3 (maintaining neutrality). The participants concurred that while the two steps were theoretically possible and necessary, in practice, it was difficult to get rid of preconceptions and bias. Misconceptions may be domiciled at the back of the mind and inevitably influence the investigator. One of the participants used a popular adage, ‘ it is difficult to teach an old dog new tricks’ to illustrate the difficulty of completely erasing misconceptions and preconceived ideas on A.I.Rs.

89 The word ‘empathy’ in step two was familiar to most of the participants and was popularly defined as ‘ putting ones’ self in the shoes of the other person’ and was successfully applied to the study of religion. To ‘interpolate’( in the same step) was rather difficult so the researcher had to explain and illustrate the term more cautiously.

The participants noted that Steps 4 and 5 (that is describing the phenomena and naming it) requires the investigator to be familiar with the language of the adherents if they are to describe and name the phenomena accurately. On step six, the researcher noted that once the student or investigator follows the proceedings carefully and where possibly participating during phenomenological investigations, they should be able to describe the processes and the relationships among the phenomena. This understanding may be enhanced by interacting with the believers and questioning them on the sequence of events and relationships between and among episodes. The ability to relate the events will be a good indicator of the mastery of this step. As with the other steps, this calls for a deeper understanding of the ritual or ceremony being studied.

Step seven that is constructing the paradigmatic model was explained as a step towards understanding the essence of religion through identifying the important elements such as ritual, song and dance, sacrifice, religious attire, religious practitioners et cetera. Once they are identified, the observer or investigator puts them into categories of the same phenomena in different religions. Through constructing a typical model of religious phenomena, the investigator moves from a localized understanding of religious phenomena (under study) to a universal understanding of religion. Thus, Cox (ibid:36) writes, “What the observer learned through his insight into the meaning of the phenomena of a specific tradition can be used to analyse similar phenomena derived from other traditions”.

At this stage, the participants illustrated their understanding of the paradigmatic model by listing the essences of A.I.R and compared them with similar phenomena in Christianity. They were quick to infer that in many ways A.I.R was similar to Christianity. This comparative approach was very popular with the participants throughout the research. This led this researcher to have keen interest in understanding the function of comparative religion in phenomenological investigations.

90 Step eight( intuiting the meaning of religion), was presented and discussed as the culmination of steps one to seven whose aim was to lead the investigator to an understanding of what A.I.R religion is all about, that is, its meaning to the believers. If the previous steps were done effectively, the observer should now be able to define what A.I.R is, thus attempting to define religion substantively. Thus Cox (ibid.:37) notes that while the investigator begins with a working definition at the beginning of the investigation, they end up with a substantive definition of religion based on personal experience of the phenomena.

The two lectures were successful as the participants were able to grasp the basic concepts and procedures of each of the nine concepts at least in theory. Through other activities such as field work and focus group discussions, the researcher deepened and built on this foundation, thus transforming this theoretical information to practical application.