Power and prejudice: A phenomenological study with criminology instructors on the intersubjectivities and invariances of conflict

Criminology is presently contested in ways beyond ethical and political argument, often ranging to implicit ontological wrangling. This thesis is an attempt to more explicit these and other issues. This project investigates phenomenological intersubjectivities and invariances with contemporary conflicts in criminology by considering the experiences and expressions of its practitioners. A brief account of the researcher’s metaphysical and pretheoretical suppositions grounds a subjective starting point for this qualitative inquiry. Key pieces of literature were drawn from Nietzsche, Husserl, and Schutz while also considering them as subjective figures themselves. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with ten active instructors from KPU’s Criminology Department. Thematic content analysis was used to process initial interview data; phenomenological methodology informed further analysis of initial findings and themes. What recurring issues in present criminological practice seem to give rise to major conflicts and interpersonal disagreements within the discipline? From these, what might be invariant factors for understanding conflict in general? What can address persistent conflicts or reduce detrimental consequences? Major normative divergences were found regarding disciplinary and pedagogical priorities. Is the disciplinary, departmental, or criminologist’s priority to teach, to “just” do research, or to find solutions to societal problems and thereby recommend actions? Agonistic positions on structural and societal matters, e.g. the role of police in society, presented key themes for conflict in criminology. These include strong intersubjective and intergroup prejudices and concurrent breakdowns in communication and cohesion. A species of false dichotomy was identified and offered as a source of communicative ambiguity and interpersonal prejudice. A recommendation of “domain-specifying” inquiry is submitted as a way to mitigate prejudices in pursuit of intersubjective understanding.