{"title":"真理、知识和创业理论:理性主义科学认识论的论证","authors":"Mark D. Packard, Per L. Bylund","doi":"10.1007/s11187-024-00993-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The replication crisis has cast social science’s epistemological foundations into question. So far, entrepreneurship scholars have responded by advocating more transparency in data collection and analysis, better empirical methods, and larger and more representative data. Here, we explore the possibility that the problem may be innate to empiricism itself within the social sciences, generally, and entrepreneurship theory, specifically. We review classical arguments and introduce new ones about how and why the weaknesses of empiricism—such as challenges of unobservability—are exacerbated in the study of human behavior, which weaknesses manifest centrally in entrepreneurship theory. These arguments suggest that social science as principally an empirical endeavor may be foolhardy, particularly in the highly agentic entrepreneurship discipline. Herein we propose a radical solution: a rationalist scientific paradigm, where phenomenological reasoning, rather than observation, is paramount. This proposal rests upon arguments that empiricism’s innate limitations can be overcome, albeit not entirely, by its rationalist counterpart. We can, we argue, develop robust scientific foundations—even laws as valid as those of the natural sciences—for entrepreneurship theory through a formal rationalist approach. These laws would necessarily be few but would serve as a much stronger foundation for entrepreneurship theory than the empirical contingencies that we observe. We conclude by illustrating what such a rationalist management program might look like for entrepreneurship scholars with Bylund’s entrepreneurial theory of the firm.</p>","PeriodicalId":21803,"journal":{"name":"Small Business Economics","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Truth, knowledge, and entrepreneurship theory: arguments for a rationalist scientific epistemology\",\"authors\":\"Mark D. Packard, Per L. Bylund\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11187-024-00993-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The replication crisis has cast social science’s epistemological foundations into question. So far, entrepreneurship scholars have responded by advocating more transparency in data collection and analysis, better empirical methods, and larger and more representative data. Here, we explore the possibility that the problem may be innate to empiricism itself within the social sciences, generally, and entrepreneurship theory, specifically. We review classical arguments and introduce new ones about how and why the weaknesses of empiricism—such as challenges of unobservability—are exacerbated in the study of human behavior, which weaknesses manifest centrally in entrepreneurship theory. These arguments suggest that social science as principally an empirical endeavor may be foolhardy, particularly in the highly agentic entrepreneurship discipline. Herein we propose a radical solution: a rationalist scientific paradigm, where phenomenological reasoning, rather than observation, is paramount. This proposal rests upon arguments that empiricism’s innate limitations can be overcome, albeit not entirely, by its rationalist counterpart. We can, we argue, develop robust scientific foundations—even laws as valid as those of the natural sciences—for entrepreneurship theory through a formal rationalist approach. These laws would necessarily be few but would serve as a much stronger foundation for entrepreneurship theory than the empirical contingencies that we observe. We conclude by illustrating what such a rationalist management program might look like for entrepreneurship scholars with Bylund’s entrepreneurial theory of the firm.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21803,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Small Business Economics\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Small Business Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-024-00993-1\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Small Business Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-024-00993-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Truth, knowledge, and entrepreneurship theory: arguments for a rationalist scientific epistemology
The replication crisis has cast social science’s epistemological foundations into question. So far, entrepreneurship scholars have responded by advocating more transparency in data collection and analysis, better empirical methods, and larger and more representative data. Here, we explore the possibility that the problem may be innate to empiricism itself within the social sciences, generally, and entrepreneurship theory, specifically. We review classical arguments and introduce new ones about how and why the weaknesses of empiricism—such as challenges of unobservability—are exacerbated in the study of human behavior, which weaknesses manifest centrally in entrepreneurship theory. These arguments suggest that social science as principally an empirical endeavor may be foolhardy, particularly in the highly agentic entrepreneurship discipline. Herein we propose a radical solution: a rationalist scientific paradigm, where phenomenological reasoning, rather than observation, is paramount. This proposal rests upon arguments that empiricism’s innate limitations can be overcome, albeit not entirely, by its rationalist counterpart. We can, we argue, develop robust scientific foundations—even laws as valid as those of the natural sciences—for entrepreneurship theory through a formal rationalist approach. These laws would necessarily be few but would serve as a much stronger foundation for entrepreneurship theory than the empirical contingencies that we observe. We conclude by illustrating what such a rationalist management program might look like for entrepreneurship scholars with Bylund’s entrepreneurial theory of the firm.
期刊介绍:
Small Business Economics: An Entrepreneurship Journal (SBEJ) publishes original, rigorous theoretical and empirical research addressing all aspects of entrepreneurship and small business economics, with a special emphasis on the economic and societal relevance of research findings for scholars, practitioners and policy makers.
SBEJ covers a broad scope of topics, ranging from the core themes of the entrepreneurial process and new venture creation to other topics like self-employment, family firms, small and medium-sized enterprises, innovative start-ups, and entrepreneurial finance. SBEJ welcomes scientific studies at different levels of analysis, including individuals (e.g. entrepreneurs'' characteristics and occupational choice), firms (e.g., firms’ life courses and performance, innovation, and global issues like digitization), macro level (e.g., institutions and public policies within local, regional, national and international contexts), as well as cross-level dynamics.
As a leading entrepreneurship journal, SBEJ welcomes cross-disciplinary research.
Officially cited as: Small Bus Econ