“Clipping an angel’s wings”: on the value and limitations of philosophy in management research
“Clipping an angel’s wings”: on the value and limitations of philosophy in management research
Ramoglou and McMullen (2022) offers a logically rigorous extension and refinement of earlier work on the conceptual foundations of entrepreneurship theory – the actualization perspective of entrepreneurship. Leunbach (2023) and Mitchell, Israelsen, Mitchell & Hua (2023) have crafted two thoughtful and highly scholarly commentaries that help augment this theoretical perspective. The backbone of our rejoinder is the rebuttal of Leunbach’s criticism of our rejection of metaphysics. We clarify that there is nothing problematic with metaphysics in the sense of abstract theorizing, philosophical questions, or uncertain answers. What is nevertheless problematic is the metaphysics that emerge when linguistic confusions derail our academic imagination. In defending our approach, we further demonstrate that the practice of “clipping an angel’s wings” – i.e., the practice of disciplining our theoretical imagination by means of philosophical analysis – is not a purely destructive endeavor. Far from that: the analytic method has a highly constructive component as well: it helps us increase conceptual clarity by laying out the ground rules that prevent our theoretical developments from becoming “nothing but houses of cards” (Wittgenstein, 1958: 118).
Ramoglou, Stratos
f3fffbf5-0f1f-46e1-93af-a13e18945610
McMullen, Jeffery S.
d2374544-f8a3-4f6c-b5f9-159d4144e28a
Ramoglou, Stratos
f3fffbf5-0f1f-46e1-93af-a13e18945610
McMullen, Jeffery S.
d2374544-f8a3-4f6c-b5f9-159d4144e28a
Ramoglou, Stratos and McMullen, Jeffery S.
(2023)
“Clipping an angel’s wings”: on the value and limitations of philosophy in management research.
Academy of Management Review.
(doi:10.5465/amr.2023.0228).
Abstract
Ramoglou and McMullen (2022) offers a logically rigorous extension and refinement of earlier work on the conceptual foundations of entrepreneurship theory – the actualization perspective of entrepreneurship. Leunbach (2023) and Mitchell, Israelsen, Mitchell & Hua (2023) have crafted two thoughtful and highly scholarly commentaries that help augment this theoretical perspective. The backbone of our rejoinder is the rebuttal of Leunbach’s criticism of our rejection of metaphysics. We clarify that there is nothing problematic with metaphysics in the sense of abstract theorizing, philosophical questions, or uncertain answers. What is nevertheless problematic is the metaphysics that emerge when linguistic confusions derail our academic imagination. In defending our approach, we further demonstrate that the practice of “clipping an angel’s wings” – i.e., the practice of disciplining our theoretical imagination by means of philosophical analysis – is not a purely destructive endeavor. Far from that: the analytic method has a highly constructive component as well: it helps us increase conceptual clarity by laying out the ground rules that prevent our theoretical developments from becoming “nothing but houses of cards” (Wittgenstein, 1958: 118).
Text
AMR-2023-0228.final
- Accepted Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only until 12 July 2024.
Request a copy
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 12 July 2023
e-pub ahead of print date: 14 July 2023
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 479942
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/479942
ISSN: 0363-7425
PURE UUID: a5b3d59d-7837-496e-be37-ca61a98def2e
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 31 Jul 2023 16:38
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 03:34
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Jeffery S. McMullen
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics
