1
,Chapter 1 “Why philosophy of science?”
Introduction
Science = aims at knowledge of patterns, structures, regularities and laws
- They do not state something about a specific example or business
Management studies = aim to gain knowledge about certain kinds of businesses and certain types of
successful logistics management
- Looking for principles and patterns that are valid in general
Generalizability = important = science has a clear goal = to explain and understand phenomena
Scrutiny = critical observation or examination
Trustworthiness of scientific results require controllability, which in turn requires repeatability = it
should be possible to check how research has been performed à the data and the techniques of
collecting, sorting and interpreting the data should be explicit and the arguments supporting the
scientific result should be crystal clear
Five features of scientific knowledge
Five important characteristics which are meant to guarantee the trustworthiness of scientific results
1. Generalizability = explain and understand phenomena
2. Controllability = research needs to be transparent and repeatable
3. Objectivity = research should strive for independence of external pressure and influence
4. Validity of methods = methods of research must be accepted as valid among scholars
5. Parsimony = the demand for clear and simple methods of explanation
*Parsimony cannot always be reached due to its limits
Misconceptions with regard to the methods in the management sciences I
Only empirical research counts as scientific
Empirical social scientific research = research of phenomena using surveys, interviews, field studies,
- Basic understanding of the concept is needed, before we can see the phenomenon grasped
by that concept
Theoretical concepts: words like “organization”, “company”, “management”, “market” à these
words are theoretical concepts which require thorough philosophical thought, in order to understand
their exact meaning and the reality they refer to
You do not necessary need “good definitions”, but there is no way of studying any entity or
phenomenon without a thorough discussion of the concepts with which we describe and grasp that
entity of phenomenon
Every form of observation is shaped by conceptual presuppositions 1 and a whole body of background
knowledge
1
Presuppositions = a thing tacitly assumed beforehand at the beginning of a line of argument or course of
action
2
, What we see, what we observe, the data we collect is, only intelligible within theories, within a body
of presuppositions
Theories constitute a “conceptual gestalt” = concepts make it possible to observe phenomena, to see
them as being of a certain sort
In scientific disciplines, specialists are intensively engaged in the exchange of conclusive reasons for
or against specific interpretations of the core concepts in their field
à those reasons are provided by a thorough analysis and critical reconstruction of the meaning and
use of a particular concept
à such an analysis makes explicit and adjusts our common knowledge of the meaning and extension
of core concepts
à in science, careful reasoning is as important as adequate observation
Misconceptions with regard to the methods in the management sciences
II Scientific research is only descriptive, never prescriptive or normative
Most management theories are not just descriptive, but in many respects also prescriptive
Descriptive = informative
Prescriptive = what should be, normative, giving reason to do something a certain way
à studies in management science are regularly meant to provide a standard of successful
management and a description of the ways in which companies can live up to that standard
What is best is mostly defined in terms of what is successful
à how is success defined and measured?
à A successful company is not only profitable for its stockholders, it is also profitable in terms of
quality products and services that it can deliver and guarantee, and in terms of meaningful labor and
career opportunities it provides
As part of the scientific research process, discussants exchange reason supporting their belief, not so
that one wins, but so that the truth wins
Scientific debate and/or scholarly discussion is a normative process. Scientists want to know the
truth, both in a factual sense and in a normative sense.
The good reason model of truth
A good reason model of truth = a claim is true, if it is supported by the balance of reasons
à A claim is supported by the balance of reasons if the reasons in favor of the claim decisively
outweigh the reasons against the claim
Sometimes, a reason for a claim may be decisive or conclusive by itself à No other reasons are
needed to support the claim
Most of the time, various reasons have to be weighted in order to see what claim is justified given
the balance of reasons for and against the claims available
3
