The structure of theory and the structure of scientific revolutions: What constitutes an advance in theory?
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Steven E. Wallis (ed.)
IGI Global (2010)
From a Kuhnian perspective, a paradigmatic revolution in management science will significantly improve our understanding of the business world and show practitioners (including managers and consultants) how to become much more effective. Without an objective measure of revolution, however, the door is open for spurious claims of revolutionary advance. Such claims cause confusion among scholars and practitioners and reduce the legitimacy of university management programs. Metatheoretical methods, based on insights from systems theory, provide new tools for analyzing the structure of theory. Propositional analysis is one such method that may be applied to objectively quantify the formal robustness of management theory. In this chapter, I use propositional analysis to analyze different versions of a theory as it evolves across 1,500 years of history. This analysis shows how the increasing robustness of theory anticipates the arrival of revolution and suggests an innovative and effective way for scholars and practitioners to develop and evaluate theories of management.
|Keywords||metatheory critical metatheory philosophy of science robustness kuhn scientific revolution|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Paul Hoyningen-Huene (2008). Thomas Kuhn and the Chemical Revolution. Foundations of Chemistry 10 (2):101-115.
Hanne Andersen (2006). The Cognitive Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Cambridge University Press.
Steven E. Wallis (2008). THE INTEGRAL PUZZLE Determining the Integrality of Integral Theory. Reading Room.
Paul Hoyningen-Huene (1993). Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn's Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago Press.
K. Brad Wray (2013). The Future of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Topoi 32 (1):75-79.
Steven E. Wallis (2012). The Right Tool for the Job: Philosophy's Evolving Role in Advancing Management Theory. Philosophy of Management 6 (3):8.
Morton E. Winston (1976). Did a Scientific Revolution Occur in Linguistics? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1976:25-33.
K. Brad Wray (2007). Kuhnian Revolutions Revisited. Synthese 158 (1):61-73.
Xiaoping Chen (2006). Bayesian Test and Kuhn's Paradigm. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 1 (3):491-505.
A. Bird (2012). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and its Significance: An Essay Review of the Fiftieth Anniversary Edition. [REVIEW] British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (4):859-883.
Steven E. Wallis (2010). Toward More Robust Policy Models. Integral Review 6 (1):153-160.
William Goodwin (2013). Structure and Scientific Controversies. Topoi 32 (1):101-110.
Alex Levine (2010). Thomas Kuhn's Cottage. Perspectives on Science 18 (3):369-377.
B. Larvor (2003). Why Did Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions Cause a Fuss? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (2):369-390.
Added to index2011-10-22
Total downloads115 ( #36,280 of 1,937,449 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #292,091 of 1,937,449 )
How can I increase my downloads?