A strong case for Soft Science

In this essay, I reflect on Gastaldo and Eakin’s Practising Soft Science in the Field of Health, where critical qualitative research is a methodology, with epistemological, axiological and theoretical underpinnings. I highlight the emerging key elements raised in the commentary, discussing the value that it contributes to creating an institutional presence for critical qualitative research in the health sciences. I draw attention to the invisible, often emotional, labor associated with this strategy while elaborating on the strengths of this approach. I argue that forming an aligned collective counters the dominant, positivist orientation in what Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2021) calls “gladiator scholarship”. Instead, it allows for exploring the locus of enunciation (Mignolo, 2009), laying inequities to bear. Through implementing these strategies, critical qualitative research has the potential to contribute to generative disruption by creating soft science that fuels social transformation.