Journal of Business Ethics 167 (1):49-62 (2020)

Abstract
Researchers misunderstand their role in creating ethical problems when they allow dogmas to purportedly divorce scientists and scientific practices from the values that they embody. Cortina, Edwards, and Powell help us clarify and further develop our position by responding to our critique of, and alternatives to, this misleading separation. In this rebuttal, we explore how the desire to achieve the separation of facts and values is unscientific on the very terms endorsed by its advocates—this separation is refuted by empirical observation. We show that positivists like Cortina and Edwards offer no rigorous theoretical or empirical justifications to substantiate their claims, let alone critique ours. Following Powell, we point to how classical pragmatism understands ‘purpose’ in scientific pursuits while also providing an alternative to the dogmas of positivism and related philosophical positions. In place of dogmatic, unscientific cries about an abstract and therefore always-unobservable ‘reality,’ we invite all organizational scholars to join us in shifting the discussion about quantitative research towards empirically grounded scientific inquiry. This makes the ethics of actual people and their practices central to quantitative research, including the thoughts, discourses, and behaviors of researchers who are always in particular places doing particular things. We propose that quantitative researchers can thus start to think about their research practices as a kind of work, rather than having the status of a kind of dogma. We conclude with some implications that this has for future research and education, including the relevance of research and research methods.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10551-019-04189-6
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,464
External links

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

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - University of Chicago Press.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature.Richard Rorty - 1979 - Princeton University Press.

View all 83 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Deepening Methods in Business Ethics.R. Edward Freeman & Michelle Greenwood - 2020 - Journal of Business Ethics 161 (1):1-3.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Demystifying the Influential IS Legends of Positivism.Mikko Siponen & Aggeliki Tsohou - 2018 - Journal of the Association for Information Systems 19 (7):600-617.
Rethinking Objectivity in Social Science.Eleonora Montuschi - 2004 - Social Epistemology 18 (2-3):109-122.
Skeptical Rationalism.William Berkson - 1979 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 22 (1-4):281 – 320.
Human Research and Complexity Theory.James Horn - 2008 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 40 (1):130-143.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-05-30

Total views
14 ( #735,535 of 2,520,785 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,623 of 2,520,785 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes