哲学家的角落

IF 2.8 4区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Data Base for Advances in Information Systems Pub Date : 2021-04-28 DOI:10.1145/3462766.3462773
J. Mendling, N. Berente, S. Seidel, Thomas Grisold
{"title":"哲学家的角落","authors":"J. Mendling, N. Berente, S. Seidel, Thomas Grisold","doi":"10.1145/3462766.3462773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In an effort to contribute to the recent debate around epistemological and methodological anarchism inspired by the thinking of Paul Feyerabend, we reflect on Habermas's pragmatist perspective of social science. We argue that the information systems field instantiates a sort of pluralism that goes beyond the relativistic conclusions of Feyerabend. This is evident through the different traditions of research into business processes and organizational routines. There is a healthy diversity of epistemological and methodological approaches in this research. Accompanying this diversity is an openness to novelty and change. Yet, at the same time, this does not necessitate the abandonment of rigor and a cumulative tradition implied by \"anything goes.\" Anything does not go, and that's a good thing. There is not a singular, hegemonic approach to what constitutes strong information systems research, but neither have we devolved into anarchy.","PeriodicalId":46842,"journal":{"name":"Data Base for Advances in Information Systems","volume":"327 1","pages":"127 - 140"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Philosopher's Corner\",\"authors\":\"J. Mendling, N. Berente, S. Seidel, Thomas Grisold\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3462766.3462773\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In an effort to contribute to the recent debate around epistemological and methodological anarchism inspired by the thinking of Paul Feyerabend, we reflect on Habermas's pragmatist perspective of social science. We argue that the information systems field instantiates a sort of pluralism that goes beyond the relativistic conclusions of Feyerabend. This is evident through the different traditions of research into business processes and organizational routines. There is a healthy diversity of epistemological and methodological approaches in this research. Accompanying this diversity is an openness to novelty and change. Yet, at the same time, this does not necessitate the abandonment of rigor and a cumulative tradition implied by \\\"anything goes.\\\" Anything does not go, and that's a good thing. There is not a singular, hegemonic approach to what constitutes strong information systems research, but neither have we devolved into anarchy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Data Base for Advances in Information Systems\",\"volume\":\"327 1\",\"pages\":\"127 - 140\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Data Base for Advances in Information Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3462766.3462773\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Data Base for Advances in Information Systems","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3462766.3462773","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

为了对最近围绕保罗·费耶阿本德思想启发的认识论和方法论无政府主义的辩论有所贡献,我们反思了哈贝马斯的社会科学实用主义观点。我们认为,信息系统领域实例化了一种超越费耶阿本德的相对论结论的多元主义。通过对业务流程和组织例程的不同研究传统,可以明显看出这一点。在这一研究中,认识论和方法论的方法是健康的多样性。伴随着这种多样性的是对新奇和变化的开放态度。然而,与此同时,这并不需要放弃严谨和“一切皆有可能”所暗示的累积传统。任何东西都不会消失,这是件好事。对于什么是强大的信息系统研究,并不存在单一的、霸权的方法,但我们也没有陷入无政府状态。
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
The Philosopher's Corner
In an effort to contribute to the recent debate around epistemological and methodological anarchism inspired by the thinking of Paul Feyerabend, we reflect on Habermas's pragmatist perspective of social science. We argue that the information systems field instantiates a sort of pluralism that goes beyond the relativistic conclusions of Feyerabend. This is evident through the different traditions of research into business processes and organizational routines. There is a healthy diversity of epistemological and methodological approaches in this research. Accompanying this diversity is an openness to novelty and change. Yet, at the same time, this does not necessitate the abandonment of rigor and a cumulative tradition implied by "anything goes." Anything does not go, and that's a good thing. There is not a singular, hegemonic approach to what constitutes strong information systems research, but neither have we devolved into anarchy.
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
Data Base for Advances in Information Systems
Data Base for Advances in Information Systems INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
Four Decades of Chief Information Officer Research: A Literature Review and Research Agenda Based on Main Path Analysis The Role of Social Media Analytics in Providing Product Intelligence: A Qualitative Study A Design Theory for Certification Presentations Unpacking Human and AI Complementarity: Insights from Recent Works Let's Quit Together: Exploring Textual Factors Promoting Supportive Interactions in Online Cannabis Support Forums
×
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