Organizational culture and theoretical entities like electrons are some important things in common. First, the real people were, in principle, with the naked eye, so while their "reality" was frequently the subject and ask if it has an impact on things that you be seen and measured, are very, very real - just a Cartesian skeptic would doubt their existence. Secondly, perhaps the most convincing argument for the realism of electrons and organizational> Culture is that it is as powerful tools, tools that can be selectively used to make a difference in the physical world, can be used. In the case of electrons that can be sprayed from phosphor emitter material on the back of the monitor to create images of Super Bowl advertising, and carried with miles and miles of wire to power lights and other equipment for the entire city. In the case of organizational culture can be used to teach people to see howthe world - a powerful tool to convey the message about "how things are moving in the neighborhood." Strong cultural norms about what is (not) acceptable behavior in the workplace can powerfully shape how people "see" oneself, others and the world around them. Thus, while organizational culture is invisible, not a toy, and by providing a philosophical and epistemological basis of cultural and realism, as cultural work in organizations is a key element to learn moredescribe exactly what the culture is, how it works and how they are used to create positive change.
Ian Hacking Paper, Representatives to intervene and have a defense refreshing, provocative and powerful scientific realism. While the book is a classic introduction to philosophy of science, but also offers suggestions to develop a view of cultural realism, based on solid experimental and scientific purposes. The themes ofrepresented, and among the terms of the theory agree (representative) and experiment (between) and follow the issue, often debated, "What comes first, theory or experiment." Hacking also describes the difference between the theoretical constructs (theory and mathematical formalisms, which was built to describe the behavior of physical phenomena) and to measure the theoretical unity (invisible things) we are in the physical world, such as electrons. A clear distinction betweentheoretical constructs and theoretical unity is seen as crucial for understanding the complexity of the debate between scientific realism and post-modern deconstructionist view, especially when it comes to the creation of a naturalistic conception of realism, cultural and organizational culture.
The first half of Hacking book focuses on the concept of "representation" and begins with a serious review of the different accounts of scientific rationality and objectivity. The views of Thomas Kuhn,Paul Feyerabend, Imre Lakatos, Hillary Putnam, Bas van Fraassen, Nancy Cartwright, and other great scholars of philosophy of science are professionally assessed and the advantages and disadvantages theorists to include in any case are clearly defined. Hacking also describes when it accepts (and does not agree), with these different perspectives in relation to its point of view of scientific realism. The second half of the book focuses on the concept of "intervention" and is one of the most detailed and convincingphilosophical analysis of experimental science in the press. Hacking presents the accounts of the history of science shows that detailed experimental science, a life of its own, regardless of the theoretical constructs to build more theoretically oriented scientists.
For hacking (and Putnam), is something "real" if it makes a physical difference. If there is no physical difference, it is not true. In other words, if theoretical entities like electrons, which in principle notcan be used systematically to see something that you expect in a cause-effect) (TV sets, then these bodies are in the true sense of the word are really influencing. Hacking, as he says,
"As far as I'm concerned, if they are real ... then spray the experimental work provides the strongest evidence in favor of scientific realism. This is not because we are testing hypotheses about individuals. And 'when companies that operate in the principles is not possible, "he observed" are regularly manipulated to produce a tooto explore new phenomena and other aspects of nature. These are tools, tools that do not believe, but for that. "
So, the reality has more to do with causality (we do) the world as it is (without the representation of theoretical constructs and mathematical formalisms to describe the scientists building as is) the world. The most powerful and persuasive representations of reality that comes from our ability to change the world, and measure the characteristics and nature of these changes.Hacking believes that while the philosophical issues related to scientific realism, is not convincing, since they are only theoretical constructs are solved (was) that a consistent approach that links theoretical constructs and units theoretical (TRA) provides a convincing argument for the scientific realism. In particular, it generates a model of scientific practice, that does not diminish the importance of theory in the field of experimental science, not denying, but experimentalScience, the nature of the subjective theory proposed activity scale in Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
Thus, scientists can see how "the world with their disciplinary paradigms strongly influence the type of experiments they are doing and how to interpret the results of the" get "reinforces their original point of view - what the Breckenridge Institute ® asks a lake -Do-Get Process ®, a self-fulfilling prophecy is. But the world is possible, its right of vetoExpectations with the anomalies that behave according to expectations of scientists deny himself. The pages of history of science is full of examples of this type scattered as the reduction in motion of the planets in a geocentric model of the solar system. From this point of view of scientific "truth" is actually an infinite series of successive approximations in the correspondence between the theoretical constructs, researchers have built and the theoretical enterprise, which will measure them and to describe increasingly reliable.For example, the map of the theoretical constructs of quantum electrodynamics (QED) for the measurements of the theoretical entities with a precision of one part in 10-12. If the distance between New York and Los Angeles to measure the reliability, we know that the distance to ensure the accuracy of the thickness of a human hair.
Hacking defense of scientific realism in science is a foundation on which a scientifically sound theory of knowledge and buildThe philosophy for the study of organizational culture. It provides a framework in which to speak of how organizational culture is real, and how this is not real. Using the same argument of hacking and Putnam, are the cultural norms "real" if they have a physical difference between people who act in a day-to-life. If the organizational culture, which makes no physical difference, then it is not true. In other words, if the theoretical entities, suchcultural norms that are not visible, can be used to systematically interfere with something that is seen in a cause-effect (organizational performance), then these cultural institutions are really in the true sense of the word. The concept of cultural realism enables us about Emile Durkheim believes that social processes affect us so real as the laws of gravity, and begin to organizational culture as a pragmatic tool to be used to change the lives of every day See CircularReality of organizational life. For example, create just the culture as a tool for change is a real impact on the level of destructive conflict in organizations, the climate of trust or mistrust between managers and direct relationships and the ability of organizations to achieve greater efficiency and its mission met (or higher), their goals.
So the bottom line is that, provided that culture is not just a passive set of tacit beliefs and assumptions into question the way things are happen in a particular cultural context. It is - but it is much more. Culture is a powerful tool for changing the day to day activities of organizational life. As described elsewhere as the equation ™ cultural, organizational culture is an interdependent reality is the connection to believe, do and achieve results, not just a question tacit belief structure as many cultural theorists and practitioners (see Mark Bodnarczuk, The> Culture equation: Take the Mystery Out of organizational culture) for further discussion on this topic. When viewed as a tool to change the organizational culture is a practical tool for the formation of the people themselves, others and the world with the objective to create a deep lasting change in organizations and individuals who see populate (Mark Bodnarczuk, When it comes to organizational culture, What You See Is What You Get forFurther discussion on this topic).
To repeat, while the organizational culture is invisible, not a toy, model and manufacture of scientific realism of hacking into a solid base of cultural realism is an essential element of a more precise description of what is culture, how it works and how it can be used to create positive change within an organization. They tried in a world of postmodern deconstructionist time to unravel the fabric of reality in our world, HackingRepresentation and should be read between a breath of fresh air and a must for those who want to pursue the matter if the organizational culture really is, in fact.
แสดงความคิดเห็น