真理、知识和创业理论:理性主义科学认识论的论证

IF 6.5 1区 经济学 Q1 BUSINESS
Mark D. Packard, Per L. Bylund
{"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

复制危机使社会科学的认识论基础受到质疑。到目前为止,创业学者们的回应是倡导在数据收集和分析方面提高透明度,采用更好的实证方法,以及更大、更有代表性的数据。在这里,我们探讨了这个问题可能是社会科学中经验主义本身固有的可能性,特别是创业理论。我们回顾了经典论点,并介绍了关于经验主义的弱点——如不可观察性的挑战——如何以及为什么在人类行为研究中加剧的新论点,这些弱点在创业理论中集中体现。这些论点表明,社会科学作为一种主要的经验性努力可能是鲁莽的,特别是在高度代理的创业学科中。在此,我们提出一个激进的解决方案:一个理性主义的科学范式,其中现象学推理,而不是观察,是最重要的。这一建议基于这样的论点:经验主义的先天局限性可以被理性主义的对应物克服,尽管不是完全克服。我们认为,通过一种正式的理性主义方法,我们可以为创业理论建立坚实的科学基础——甚至是与自然科学一样有效的定律。这些规律必然很少,但会作为创业理论比我们观察到的经验偶然性更强大的基础。最后,我们用Bylund的企业创业理论来说明,对于创业学者来说,这种理性主义的管理方案可能是什么样子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
9.40%
发文量
124
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
×
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