1.4.2 The Subordination of Theory

The discipline of the academic education, which I enjoyed to undergo, forced me to formulate research questions. Yet, they never became my „religion”. In a sense, I experienced myself more agnostic towards my own scholarly discipline and knowledge than towards the believers I researched. Others have long analysed the lack of agreement on theory formation in social science (Coenen 1989: 49. Giddens 1984: 13. Kloos 1991: 154. Ortner 1984: 127. Wilterdink and Heerikhuizen 1989: 388).

As a marketplace of theories (Droogers 1990: 1-5), social science can sometimes appear trendy like fashion industry. A declining rush on organizational culture may be an indication of that. Since I doubt fashion in consumerism (Goudzwaard and De Lange 1995), why should I trust it in science? Trying to be aware of trends does not require to follow their moods. Likewise, following them does not require to be aware of them.

I wished no theory that forced me to pour down the movement's social reality into an alien mould. As I intuitively and cognitively related theories that I knew to the social reality that I perceived, many appeared good for something, yet none for everything that I met and wished to explore. Curious as I was, I wished for a Swiss pocket knife of social science theories. I wanted eclectically to take out the tool that a situation or phenomenon suggested (Quinn and Strauss 1994: 285), not vice versa.

I aspired to give the reality that I had begun to perceive priority over theory, to describe reality by subordination of theory. The forming of theory could occur as byproduct of the former, like the fourfold typology „popped up” unsought for already in the beginning of this study. To begin, I needed no microscope, but some wide-angle-lens that would not narrow my anyway limited horizon (Kloos 1991: 154).

Finally, I myself was this pocket-knife. First encounters already revealed a small but ideologically complex movement. An anthropological approach appeared thus promising to perceive it thoroughly without entangling in ongoing disputes between antithetical communities (Cohen 1992: 115). If this study achieved such clearance, it might serve orientation. If it serves orientation, it might even serve consultation (Wilterdink and Heerikhuizen 1989: 407-408).