{"title":"迈向批判性工作和组织心理学中的模糊伦理:从 \"空白 \"到 \"问题 \"主观性","authors":"Parisa Dashtipour, Nathan Gerard, Duarte Rolo","doi":"10.1007/s10551-024-05760-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In recent years, a scholarly movement has taken hold that is critical of work and organizational psychology (WOP). Referred to as critical work and organizational psychology (CWOP), this movement problematizes some of the foundational premises of WOP, including its lack of reflexivity on its own values and ethics. While bringing increased attention to reflexivity and ethics as vital to critical theorizing and praxis, CWOP has yet to concertedly engage with ethics. This conceptual paper has two aims. The first is to outline existing ethical approaches in CWOP. Reviewing the literature, we suggest there are currently three tentative critical–ethical positions: (1) a critique of mainstream WOP for its ethical failures, (2) espousal of a radical humanist ethics, and (3) an ethics of ambiguity. The latter is embedded in CWOP literature, but not yet articulated as such. Our second aim is therefore to make an ethics of ambiguity a recognized and explicitly embraced form of ethics that is rooted in a sustained engagement with the conceptualization of subjectivity as such. To clarify the risks inherent to theorizing ethics without a sufficiently robust understanding of subjectivity, we juxtapose ‘blank subjectivity’ with ‘troubled subjectivity,’ two notions informed by psychoanalysis and psychosocial studies. We argue that a theory of subjectivity as troubled is at the heart of an ethics of ambiguity. The paper concludes by discussing the contribution of an ethics of ambiguity to CWOP, while also pointing to some convergences between the different critical–ethical positions.</p>","PeriodicalId":15279,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward an Ethics of Ambiguity in Critical Work and Organizational Psychology: From ‘Blank’ to ‘Troubled’ Subjectivity\",\"authors\":\"Parisa Dashtipour, Nathan Gerard, Duarte Rolo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10551-024-05760-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In recent years, a scholarly movement has taken hold that is critical of work and organizational psychology (WOP). Referred to as critical work and organizational psychology (CWOP), this movement problematizes some of the foundational premises of WOP, including its lack of reflexivity on its own values and ethics. While bringing increased attention to reflexivity and ethics as vital to critical theorizing and praxis, CWOP has yet to concertedly engage with ethics. This conceptual paper has two aims. The first is to outline existing ethical approaches in CWOP. Reviewing the literature, we suggest there are currently three tentative critical–ethical positions: (1) a critique of mainstream WOP for its ethical failures, (2) espousal of a radical humanist ethics, and (3) an ethics of ambiguity. The latter is embedded in CWOP literature, but not yet articulated as such. Our second aim is therefore to make an ethics of ambiguity a recognized and explicitly embraced form of ethics that is rooted in a sustained engagement with the conceptualization of subjectivity as such. To clarify the risks inherent to theorizing ethics without a sufficiently robust understanding of subjectivity, we juxtapose ‘blank subjectivity’ with ‘troubled subjectivity,’ two notions informed by psychoanalysis and psychosocial studies. We argue that a theory of subjectivity as troubled is at the heart of an ethics of ambiguity. The paper concludes by discussing the contribution of an ethics of ambiguity to CWOP, while also pointing to some convergences between the different critical–ethical positions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Business Ethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Business Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05760-6\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05760-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Toward an Ethics of Ambiguity in Critical Work and Organizational Psychology: From ‘Blank’ to ‘Troubled’ Subjectivity
In recent years, a scholarly movement has taken hold that is critical of work and organizational psychology (WOP). Referred to as critical work and organizational psychology (CWOP), this movement problematizes some of the foundational premises of WOP, including its lack of reflexivity on its own values and ethics. While bringing increased attention to reflexivity and ethics as vital to critical theorizing and praxis, CWOP has yet to concertedly engage with ethics. This conceptual paper has two aims. The first is to outline existing ethical approaches in CWOP. Reviewing the literature, we suggest there are currently three tentative critical–ethical positions: (1) a critique of mainstream WOP for its ethical failures, (2) espousal of a radical humanist ethics, and (3) an ethics of ambiguity. The latter is embedded in CWOP literature, but not yet articulated as such. Our second aim is therefore to make an ethics of ambiguity a recognized and explicitly embraced form of ethics that is rooted in a sustained engagement with the conceptualization of subjectivity as such. To clarify the risks inherent to theorizing ethics without a sufficiently robust understanding of subjectivity, we juxtapose ‘blank subjectivity’ with ‘troubled subjectivity,’ two notions informed by psychoanalysis and psychosocial studies. We argue that a theory of subjectivity as troubled is at the heart of an ethics of ambiguity. The paper concludes by discussing the contribution of an ethics of ambiguity to CWOP, while also pointing to some convergences between the different critical–ethical positions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Business Ethics publishes only original articles from a wide variety of methodological and disciplinary perspectives concerning ethical issues related to business that bring something new or unique to the discourse in their field. Since its initiation in 1980, the editors have encouraged the broadest possible scope. The term `business'' is understood in a wide sense to include all systems involved in the exchange of goods and services, while `ethics'' is circumscribed as all human action aimed at securing a good life. Systems of production, consumption, marketing, advertising, social and economic accounting, labour relations, public relations and organisational behaviour are analysed from a moral viewpoint. The style and level of dialogue involve all who are interested in business ethics - the business community, universities, government agencies and consumer groups. Speculative philosophy as well as reports of empirical research are welcomed. In order to promote a dialogue between the various interested groups as much as possible, papers are presented in a style relatively free of specialist jargon.