My research interests cut across a number of subfields in social studies, including sociology of knowledge, self & self-concept, new media, mental health, and meta-theory. Currently, I am doing research on the paradox of situated knowledge.

It is a basic tenet of sociology that all forms of human knowledge are created by humans situated in specific social and historical contexts, and it is also the aspiration of science to obtain objective knowledge about the world. However, how is it possible for situated knowers to attain objective knowledge free of the biases associated with the knowers’ particular situatedness?

If absolute objectivity is unattainable, how is the veracity of human knowledge to be defined and assessed? If the criterion of truth is relative, does it mean that all knowledge is equally valid or invalid depending on one’s standpoint? If that is the case, what is the purpose of scientific research? In what way are scientific findings different from mere opinions?

What is the impact of society on knowledge acquisition? Does social influence contribute biases to human knowledge? Is there a fundamental difference between social research and natural science in the type of knowledge they generate? If biases and errors are unavoidable in research, where is the veracity of human knowledge ultimately grounded?

These are some of the questions I seek to address in my current research.