TourismResearchMethodology：CananArgumentabout“Ism”BeFound？ ADiscussionwithSongZiqian，ZhangBin，etal.

Abstract：ZiqianSong’sarticleTheArgumentbetweenPositivismandPhenomenologyinTourismResearch，publishedinTourismTribune（2013，Vol.28，18～24）examinestwoviewpoints.OneisfromBaojiaShenwho statesthat“tourismisaproductofthedevelopmentofthemarketeconomy”andtheotherisfromProf.YanjunXie whostatesthat“theessenceoftourismisexperience”.TheviewsofMr.ShenandProf.Xiedonotrepresent opposingschoolsofthought.Mr.ShenandProf.Xiehaveneitherexpresseddisagreementsnorobjectionstoward eachother，norhavetheyclaimedthattheirowntheoriesaretheonlycorrectones.Onthecontrary，theybothhave showedanattitudeofacademicgenerosityandopennessinapplyingdifferentmethodologiesduringtheirresearch andthisisclearlyseenintheirexpressedviews.TheArgumentbetweenPositivismandPhenomenologyinTourism Researchdraws1conclusionsfromMr.Shen’sandProf.Xie’spropositionsbecauseitfailstoconsiderthat differenttypesofacademictopicscallfordifferentresearchmethods.Mr.ShenandProf.Xieinvestigatedifferent aspectsoftourismandhencehaveuseddifferentapproaches；theirviewshavealsoevolvedfromdifferenthistorical backgrounds.BothMr.ShenandProf.Xiehighlighttheimportanceofapplyingdifferentresearchmethodsin tourismstudies.Prof.Xiehascomprehensivelyanalyzeddifferentapproachestoavarietyofresearchquestions.He groupedquestionsintofourcategories，thatis，what；why；how；andwhattodo.Basedonthesecategoriesboth empiricalandphenomenologicalapproachescanbechosen.WebelievethattheconclusionsdrawnbyZiqianSong inTheArgumentbetweenPositivismandPhenomenologyinTourismResearcharescientificallyflawed.Ifthese incorrectconclusionsarenotclarified，theywillleadtounnecessaryandeven1debatesintourismacademiaand thiswillmisleadthedirectionofacademicresearch.TheanalysisofphenomenologicalmethodologyinSong’s articleexposesseveraldefectsintheuseofsomebasicconceptsandtheunderstandingofphenomenology’s academicstatus.Thebluntdivisionoftheuseofqualitativevsquantitativemethodologiesinphenomenologystudies andthesuperficialinterpretationinSong’sarticleshouldbecorrected.Theuseofthenotionof“technical rationality”inSong’sarticleshouldalsobeamended.Shenequatestechnicalrationalitytoinstrumentalrationality. Althoughthesetermsarecloselyrelatedtheyarenotinterchangeable.Furthermore，therearesomeotherspecific questionsraisedinSong’sarticletowardMr.Shen’sandProf.Xie’sresearchthatrequireclarification.Song questionswhetherthetourofpoetsandaristocratsintheTangandSongDynastyshouldbecountedastourism.This questionhasalreadybeenaddressedinMr.Shen’sbook.Tourismresearchisinarelativelyearlystageof developmentinChina，andhenceitisofutmostimportancethatwesetdowngoodprotocols.Thedevelopmentof basictheoriesandmethodologiesmustbeconductedwithanobjectiveandstrictattitudeaswellaswiththeright scientificspirit，sothatfurtherresearchinthisareaisfruitful.Ourarticleattemptstoclarifythecorepropositions intheworksofMr.ShenandProf.Xie.WealsoaimtorectifytheinappropriatestatementsinTheArgument betweenPositivismandPhenomenologyinTourismResearch，andweproposeseveralopinions，whichare，of course，opentodiscussion.

Keywords：tourism；researchmethodology；positivism；phenomenology；technicalrationality