探索二元论的本体论渊源:走向组织研究中的联结思维结构

IF 2 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Scandinavian Journal of Management Pub Date : 2023-09-18 DOI:10.1016/j.scaman.2023.101302
Zara Andreea , Delacour Hélène
{"title":"探索二元论的本体论渊源:走向组织研究中的联结思维结构","authors":"Zara Andreea ,&nbsp;Delacour Hélène","doi":"10.1016/j.scaman.2023.101302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Scholars have underscored that the organization studies are afflicted by dualism which impedes new theoretical developments. To overcome dualism which considers all aspects in opposition, we adopt a philosophical approach to explore in depth its origins. We reveal that dualism has ontological origins and emerges from the progressive abandonment of the Aristotelian ontological framework and specifically his conceptualization of the four primary causes that are bound together in pairs by a reciprocal and total causality. Based on this observation, we then argue the need to scrutinize not only our epistemology and methods, but first and foremost, our ontological assumptions as they shape our structure of thought. We suggest two complementary ways to help us make these assumptions explicit and thus enable us to expand organization studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47759,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the ontological origins of dualism: Towards a conjunctive structure of thought in organization studies\",\"authors\":\"Zara Andreea ,&nbsp;Delacour Hélène\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.scaman.2023.101302\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Scholars have underscored that the organization studies are afflicted by dualism which impedes new theoretical developments. To overcome dualism which considers all aspects in opposition, we adopt a philosophical approach to explore in depth its origins. We reveal that dualism has ontological origins and emerges from the progressive abandonment of the Aristotelian ontological framework and specifically his conceptualization of the four primary causes that are bound together in pairs by a reciprocal and total causality. Based on this observation, we then argue the need to scrutinize not only our epistemology and methods, but first and foremost, our ontological assumptions as they shape our structure of thought. We suggest two complementary ways to help us make these assumptions explicit and thus enable us to expand organization studies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47759,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095652212300043X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095652212300043X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学者们强调,组织研究受到二元论的影响,阻碍了新的理论发展。为了克服把所有方面都对立起来的二元论,我们采用哲学的方法来深入探讨它的起源。我们揭示了二元论具有本体论的起源,并产生于对亚里士多德本体论框架的逐渐放弃,特别是他对四个主要原因的概念化,这四个主要因素通过互惠和完全的因果关系成对地结合在一起。基于这一观察,我们认为,不仅需要仔细审查我们的认识论和方法,而且最重要的是,我们的本体论假设,因为它们塑造了我们的思想结构。我们提出了两种互补的方法来帮助我们明确这些假设,从而使我们能够扩展组织研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Exploring the ontological origins of dualism: Towards a conjunctive structure of thought in organization studies

Scholars have underscored that the organization studies are afflicted by dualism which impedes new theoretical developments. To overcome dualism which considers all aspects in opposition, we adopt a philosophical approach to explore in depth its origins. We reveal that dualism has ontological origins and emerges from the progressive abandonment of the Aristotelian ontological framework and specifically his conceptualization of the four primary causes that are bound together in pairs by a reciprocal and total causality. Based on this observation, we then argue the need to scrutinize not only our epistemology and methods, but first and foremost, our ontological assumptions as they shape our structure of thought. We suggest two complementary ways to help us make these assumptions explicit and thus enable us to expand organization studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Management (SJM) provides an international forum for innovative and carefully crafted research on different aspects of management. We promote dialogue and new thinking around theory and practice, based on conceptual creativity, reasoned reflexivity and contextual awareness. We have a passion for empirical inquiry. We promote constructive dialogue among researchers as well as between researchers and practitioners. We encourage new approaches to the study of management and we aim to foster new thinking around management theory and practice. We publish original empirical and theoretical material, which contributes to understanding management in private and public organizations. Full-length articles and book reviews form the core of the journal, but focused discussion-type texts (around 3.000-5.000 words), empirically or theoretically oriented, can also be considered for publication. The Scandinavian Journal of Management is open to different research approaches in terms of methodology and epistemology. We are open to different fields of management application, but narrow technical discussions relevant only to specific sub-fields will not be given priority.
期刊最新文献
Paradoxical tensions at multiple levels: A model of unbalanced supranational coopetition Shifting from an analytical paradigm to a systems paradigm: A fundamentally systemic approach of the business model concept to tackling complexity Going collective: worker takeovers, entrepreneurship and collective actions Pastoral control in remote work Untangling business model innovation in family firms: Socioemotional wealth and corporate social responsibility perspectives
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1