组织创新的认知与促进中的伊拉斯谟三段论

R. Bye, Stein E. Johansen
{"title":"组织创新的认知与促进中的伊拉斯谟三段论","authors":"R. Bye, Stein E. Johansen","doi":"10.22439/jba.v9i1.5964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"By use of an empirical example from a planned organizational change program within an international company, we examine how specific characteristics of objects (forms) used to represent ideas – in interaction with “hard-wired” aspects of human cognition – may contribute to explain outcomes of translation processes and the extent of alteration of the design of the future organization. We argue that a type of syllogism judged as invalid by criteria of formal logics – denoted as Erasmus syllogism – could be rather common in reasoning, and that these logically invalid interferences may contribute to significant innovations. Situations where syllogisms are not recognized as invalid by the involved actors seem to be more prevalent when e.g. the actors are unfamiliar with the semantic content (as e.g. abstract symbols). We argue that understanding of semiotic conditions for occurrence of formal logically invalid syllogism, as well as of the neglect of their invalidity by involved actors in ongoing discourses and reasoning, may contribute to a better understanding of how ideas and objects are translated, within organizations as well as in general. The discussion is a contribution to better understanding of why and how ideas are altered as part of ongoing sense making processes within organizations. Page 1 of 28 JBA 9(1): 111-138 Spring 2020 © The Author(s) 2020 ISSN 2245-4217 DOI: 10.22439/jba.v9i1.59 64 Journal of Business Anthropology, 9(1), Spring 2020","PeriodicalId":348499,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Anthropology","volume":"6 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Erasmus Syllogisms in Cognition and Facilitation of Organizational Innovation\",\"authors\":\"R. Bye, Stein E. Johansen\",\"doi\":\"10.22439/jba.v9i1.5964\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"By use of an empirical example from a planned organizational change program within an international company, we examine how specific characteristics of objects (forms) used to represent ideas – in interaction with “hard-wired” aspects of human cognition – may contribute to explain outcomes of translation processes and the extent of alteration of the design of the future organization. We argue that a type of syllogism judged as invalid by criteria of formal logics – denoted as Erasmus syllogism – could be rather common in reasoning, and that these logically invalid interferences may contribute to significant innovations. Situations where syllogisms are not recognized as invalid by the involved actors seem to be more prevalent when e.g. the actors are unfamiliar with the semantic content (as e.g. abstract symbols). We argue that understanding of semiotic conditions for occurrence of formal logically invalid syllogism, as well as of the neglect of their invalidity by involved actors in ongoing discourses and reasoning, may contribute to a better understanding of how ideas and objects are translated, within organizations as well as in general. The discussion is a contribution to better understanding of why and how ideas are altered as part of ongoing sense making processes within organizations. Page 1 of 28 JBA 9(1): 111-138 Spring 2020 © The Author(s) 2020 ISSN 2245-4217 DOI: 10.22439/jba.v9i1.59 64 Journal of Business Anthropology, 9(1), Spring 2020\",\"PeriodicalId\":348499,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Business Anthropology\",\"volume\":\"6 5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Business Anthropology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22439/jba.v9i1.5964\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22439/jba.v9i1.5964","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通过使用来自一家国际公司计划中的组织变革项目的经验例子,我们研究了用于表示想法的对象(形式)的具体特征-与人类认知的“硬连线”方面相互作用-可能有助于解释翻译过程的结果和未来组织设计的改变程度。我们认为,一种被形式逻辑标准判定为无效的三段论——即伊拉斯谟三段论——在推理中可能相当普遍,这些逻辑上无效的干扰可能有助于重大的创新。当参与者不熟悉语义内容(如抽象符号)时,三段论不被相关参与者认为无效的情况似乎更为普遍。我们认为,理解形式逻辑无效三段论发生的符号学条件,以及参与正在进行的话语和推理的参与者对其无效的忽视,可能有助于更好地理解组织内部以及一般情况下思想和对象是如何翻译的。讨论有助于更好地理解为什么以及如何将想法作为组织内正在进行的意义制定过程的一部分而改变。Page 1 of 28 JBA 9(1): 111-138 Spring 2020©The Author(s) 2020 ISSN 2245-4217 DOI: 10.22439/ JBA .v9i1.59 64 Journal of Business Anthropology, 9(1), Spring 2020
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Erasmus Syllogisms in Cognition and Facilitation of Organizational Innovation
By use of an empirical example from a planned organizational change program within an international company, we examine how specific characteristics of objects (forms) used to represent ideas – in interaction with “hard-wired” aspects of human cognition – may contribute to explain outcomes of translation processes and the extent of alteration of the design of the future organization. We argue that a type of syllogism judged as invalid by criteria of formal logics – denoted as Erasmus syllogism – could be rather common in reasoning, and that these logically invalid interferences may contribute to significant innovations. Situations where syllogisms are not recognized as invalid by the involved actors seem to be more prevalent when e.g. the actors are unfamiliar with the semantic content (as e.g. abstract symbols). We argue that understanding of semiotic conditions for occurrence of formal logically invalid syllogism, as well as of the neglect of their invalidity by involved actors in ongoing discourses and reasoning, may contribute to a better understanding of how ideas and objects are translated, within organizations as well as in general. The discussion is a contribution to better understanding of why and how ideas are altered as part of ongoing sense making processes within organizations. Page 1 of 28 JBA 9(1): 111-138 Spring 2020 © The Author(s) 2020 ISSN 2245-4217 DOI: 10.22439/jba.v9i1.59 64 Journal of Business Anthropology, 9(1), Spring 2020
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信