This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Tadajewski, M. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

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

School of Management, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK, mt66{at}le.ac.uk

In 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.

Key Words: cognitive bias • organization theory • paradigm incommensurability • politics • values incommensurability

Organization, Vol. 16, No. 4, 467-485 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1350508409104504


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Tadajewski The Politics of the Behavioural Revolution in Organization Studies Organization, September 1, 2009; 16(5): 733 - 754. [Abstract] [PDF]