Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The Debate That Won't Die? Values Incommensurability, Antagonism and Theory Choice

By Mark Tadajewski

Abstract

Full text of this item is not currently available on the LRA. \ud The final published version is available at http://org.sagepub.com/content/16/4/467.abstract, Doi: 10.1177/1350508409104504In this article, I examine a recent turn in the paradigm debate towards the incommensurability thesis and the proposed possibility of adjudication between theories from different paradigms. In particular, I argue that McKelvey and Baum's views (among others) appear to be based on a desire to reduce paradigmatic pluralism and, in turn, reduce uncertainty about what is the empirically valid view among competing theories. By contrast, I make the case that an incommensurability of values still permeates any attempt to engage in theory-adjudication. Such values, I assert, will stall any attempt to adjudicate between theories from different paradigms. In the face of widespread cognitive bias, confirmation bias and belief perseverance, we cannot, I conclude, hope to deal with this issue in any satisfactory way

Topics: cognitive bias, organization theory, paradigm incommensurability, politics, values incommensurability
Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
Year: 2009
DOI identifier: 10.1177/1350508409104504
OAI identifier: oai:lra.le.ac.uk:2381/8519
Journal:
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://hdl.handle.net/2381/851... (external link)
  • http://org.sagepub.com/content... (external link)
  • http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1350... (external link)
  • http://org.sagepub.com/content... (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.