{"title":"Truth Tables, True Distinctions. Paradoxes of the Source Code of Science.","authors":"Steffen Roth","doi":"10.1007/s11213-023-09640-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>On the occasion of a growing popularity of paradox theory in management and organisation research, this article provides an introduction to the paradox of true distinctions, reports on its relevance to theory building, and presents a strategy to contain the paradox without resolving it. To this end, I draw on works by George Spencer Brown and Niklas Luhmann to contextualize theory within the paradox of observation in general and the paradox of scientific observation in particular. A special case of the paradox of scientific communication, paradox theory is then redefined as a scientific programme fascinated with the paradoxical nature of the basic operation of science. I conclude that further development work on the \"source code\" of science will provide \"critical updates\" on the opportunities and limits to metatheoretical extensions of theories of management, organisation, and society, including their digital transformation.</p>","PeriodicalId":51694,"journal":{"name":"Systemic Practice and Action Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10037378/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systemic Practice and Action Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-023-09640-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
On the occasion of a growing popularity of paradox theory in management and organisation research, this article provides an introduction to the paradox of true distinctions, reports on its relevance to theory building, and presents a strategy to contain the paradox without resolving it. To this end, I draw on works by George Spencer Brown and Niklas Luhmann to contextualize theory within the paradox of observation in general and the paradox of scientific observation in particular. A special case of the paradox of scientific communication, paradox theory is then redefined as a scientific programme fascinated with the paradoxical nature of the basic operation of science. I conclude that further development work on the "source code" of science will provide "critical updates" on the opportunities and limits to metatheoretical extensions of theories of management, organisation, and society, including their digital transformation.
期刊介绍：
Systemic Practice and Action Research is dedicated to advancing deeper understandings of issues that confront the contemporary world, and better means for engaging with these issues for the benefit of individuals, organizations, communities and their natural environments. To this end, a fundamental rethink of the purposes and methods of science is needed, making it more systemic and action-orientated. The journal therefore seeks to make a substantial contribution to rethinking science as well as to the reflective application of systemic practice and action research in all types of organizational and social settings. This international journal is committed to nurturing wide-ranging conversations around both qualitative and technical approaches for the betterment of people''s lives and ways of working together. It seeks to influence policy and strategy in its advocacy of action research as a primary means to gain vision and leverage in wicked problem areas. All forms of investigation and reasoning are considered potentially suitable for publication, including personal experience. There are no priorities attached to settings for studies and no greater significance given to one methodological style over another - as long as the work demonstrates a reflective and systemic quality. The journal welcomes manuscripts that are original, are well written, and contain a vivid argument. Papers normally will demonstrate knowledge of existing literature. Full papers are normally between 5,000 – 10,000 words (although longer papers will not be excluded if the argument justifies the word count) and short papers are about 2,000 words. Notes and letters are welcomed for publication in the ''notes from the field'' and ''letters'' sections. A rigorous mentoring-based refereeing system is applied in all cases. Officially cited as: Syst Pract Action Res
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
