Reality, knowledge, truth and objectivity HEM4112 – Lecture 2 Mari Elken

Dive into philosophy… Ontology is the study of beings or their being — what is. Epistemology is the study of knowledge — how we know. Logic is the study of valid reasoning — how to reason. Ethics is the study of right and wrong — how we should act. Phenomenology is the study of our experience — how we experience. (Source: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Ontology the study of what there is – Simple enough: keys – More tricky: numbers In simplified terms: Objectivism and constructivism

Objectivism The phenomenon studied is independent of the actors, has independent existence E.g. Culture is an externally existing category, independent of the actors

Constructivism The phenomenon studied is constructed by the actors, has no independent existence – constantly revised Culture is constantly produced and negotiated by the actors involved, cannot exist independent of the actors

Realism and antirealism Discussion on the basis of accepted scientific truth, attitudes towards the world, but not fully developed doctrines Important to be clear – has implications for example construct validity Somewhat different definitions for what they mean amongst different authors NB – difference between ontological and scientific realism!

Realism non-observable phenomena actually exist (T-terms) - Example of black holes “a, b, and c and so on exist, and the fact that they exist and have properties such as F-ness, G-ness, and H-ness is independent of anyone's beliefs, linguistic practices, conceptual schemes, and so on.” (Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Antirealism a theory should never be regarded as truth (T-terms do not exist) No causality - cannot be observed directly

Realism Conditions and processes that are correct theories exist – T-terms are real Theories say something about the world, can either be true or untrue E.g. Hacking, Giere, Suppes Antirealism T-terms do not really exist, O-terms are the only really existing Theories are only a way to arrange and sort observations, they are not about the world E.g. Wodgar, von Glasersfeld, Latour

Many more -isms…

What does it take to say that something is true?

Theories of truth 1 Correspondence – common sense – the claim is true if the world in fact is like that. Theories either true or not – but does truth come in degrees (”somewhat true, grain of truth”) Facts are ”truth makers” – make a claim truthful CLAIM WORLD correspondence

Theories of truth 2 Coherence – how different claims fit with each other, does not deal with the world, internal CLAIM P1 P6 P5 P9 P2 P3 P7 P8 P4

Theories of truth 3 Instrumentalism – ”it works” – if it is useful, then it is true Effectiveness vs truth?

Theories of truth and realism/antirealism Realists can live with all three Antirealists cannot have correspondence, because they reject that the theories say anything about the world.

Relevance? Can you successfully combine different camps? Ontological considerations shape what kind of questions we ask: E.g. organisations and culture: formal characteristics, beliefs and values of the organisational culture, how they shape individuals or How people construct culture in organisations, how meaning is constructed and negotiated, what constitutes as culture

Epistemology What does it mean to know something? How do we acquire new knowledge? What is acceptable knoweldge in a discipline? How much can we know? Can we know everything? Are there things that cannot be known?

Epistemology Many epistemologies Epistemology is NOT a learning theory! Bryman: positivism and interpretivism – very broad

Positivism Bryman: – Empirically proven knowledge – Theory generates hypothesis that can be tested (deductive) – Knowledge is achieved through gathering of facts – Science is objective – Differentiation between scientific and normative statements

Empirical realism Also called naive realism Perfect correspondence between theories and claims => thus superficial

Critical realism Roy Bhaskar a central name Assume that observations are for the most part reliable, but also acknowledges that our sense data can be wrong Admits that categories are most likely temporary Widely used in social sciences

Intepretivism Contrasting positivism – People and their institutions fundamentally differnet from natural sciences – Need a different logic and procedure Phenomenology – how we make sense of the world Symbolic interactionism – interpretations of the symbolic meaning of environments

Discuss: You have to be one to know one.. ? …or as B. Fay asks – do people in different cultures live in different worlds?

Describe vs understand Social activity is between individuals and institutions/systems – how do we make sense of this? Insider-perspective Outsider-perspective

Categorising and aggregations Categorising is not the same as aggregation, even if sometimes overlap – Category: taxonomies, exclusively in one class – Aggregate: more members, more generality; BUT – can be a member of several groups

Taxonomoy of speices

Dichotomies This is when we categorise where the two mean the opposite – No degrees – either/or – BUT – we often make false dichotomies! They do not cover all, or they are not mutually exclusive State vs market

Objectivity Perceptions unreliable -> need to minimise or eliminate these effects. How? Can we have objectivity? Why?