Zen and Science
For the most part, I think Professor Benson has captured the spirit of the four articles that he has reviewed. In particular, I believe he responsibly articulates my multilectic approach to social scientific knowing. However, I would like to indicate a few subtle misinterpretations-due, I believe, to Benson’s unwillingness to accept the Zen paradigm in toto. Secondly, I would like to expand on the possibility of an integration/coupling of our organizational research endeavors. Finally, I reiterate my conclusions and heartily support Benson’s conclusions regarding the epistemological nature of social science.
KeywordsPositivistic Thought Epistemological Nature Middle Range Theory Epistemological Dimension Word Science
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Benson, J.K. Organizations: A dialectical view. American Science Quarterly, 1977, 22, 1–21. On the potentialities of middle range theory: Commentary on Bobko, Pinder and Moore, Sekaran et al., and Schuler. In C. Pinder and L. Moore (Eds.), Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations. Martinus Nijhoff, 1979.Google Scholar
- Bernstein, R.J. The Restructuring of Social and Political Thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich, 1977.Google Scholar
- Pinder, C., and Moore, L. The inevitability of multiple paradigms and the resultant need for middle range analysis in organization theory. In C. Pinder and L. Moore (Eds.), Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations. Martinus Nijhoff, 1979.Google Scholar
- Sekaran, U.; Martin, T.; Trafton; R., and Osborn, R. Nomothetical nets and higher order factor analysis in middle range theory development. In C. Pinder and L. Moore (Eds.), Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations. Martinus Nijhoff, 1979.Google Scholar