Search results

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the ontological and epistemological basis of classification.

Attention is drawn to a 1785 article on abstraction by Thomas Reid and the contents and theories of the article are explained. The Reid article both provides a sound approach to classification and is interesting historically as it influenced the classification pioneer Charles Ammi Cutter who, in turn, is responsible for much of the modern theory of functional bibliography. Reid's account is supplemented by brief descriptions of fallibilism and fuzziness. An associated view, Aristotelian essentialism is explained and criticized. Some observations are offered on the role of prototypes in classification and on the monothetic‐polythetic distinction.

Reid's theories, suitably embedded in fallibilism and augmented with a respect for truth, provide a sound ontological and epistemological basis for classification.

Reid's essay, together with an appreciation of fallibility and determinate and indeterminate properties, amount to a good basic theoretical foundation for cataloging.

Menger′s Grundsätze is explored; the Aristotelian background of the discourse is probed, as is the problematic image of Menger sketched in the secondary literature as soon as it is confronted with this Aristotelanism and with the subjective value theory and the motif of time, error and uncertainty. The conflicting elements of this picture are pieced together.

The paper aims to examine the relationship between creating capabilities and political liberalism. It argues that the reality of climate change calls for the capabilities approach to be more rooted in a relational anthropology which the Aristotelian ethical tradition is more akin to.

It discusses how traces of this ethical tradition can be found in Nussbaum's capabilities approach itself: affiliation as an architectonic capability leads to the common good being the end of political action, and practical reason as an architectonic capability leads to reasoning being structured by concerns for the common good.

The paper suggests some practical implications of an Aristotelian version of the capabilities approach.

The paper seeks to build an account of social justice based on the capabilities approach with Aristotelian roots.

This article aims to provide a response to the papers in this issue.

The methodology employed is philosophical.

In her response, Nussbaum thanks the authors for their contributions and addresses their most salient arguments.

Nussbaum in this article responds to the papers in this issue of IJSE and addresses the authors' most salient arguments.

Wisdom is a very difficult construct to work with in research and practice. One reason for this is that wise people can deal with metaphysical questions and experience spiritual phenomena, both of which are hard to measure meaningfully. Although metaphysical and spiritual matters are not imponderable, they have significant measurement problems that are also part of the shortcomings of standard social science statistical frameworks. A second reason is that for many wisdom theorists, wisdom is context-dependent because wisdom is defined by and responds to what its context presents to it. We can therefore argue that wisdom is essentially context, which in quantum physics is theorised as a superposition of random variables that interact. This chapter, therefore, ponders the ‘immeasurable’ from the perspective of quantum-like social science and quantum theory to render wisdom, including its spirituality component, in formal mathematical models. The mathematical formalism of quantum physics allows for the presence of metaphysical phenomena in its ontological foundations and its mathematical models. This chapter, therefore, also presents an argument for understanding wisdom from the superposition perspective and, in particular, the internal interactions between random variables contained within it. If the challenge of measuring wisdom as a nondeterministic system is met, we may finally have an opportunity to measure wisdom in ways that embrace wisdom's complex ontology. A third reason is that wisdom depends on people making first-person subjective judgements. Subjectivity is central to many interpretations of quantum theory, and we can borrow the analytical formalism used in quantum physics for wisdom research. Finally, the chapter discusses future approaches to empirical wisdom research that adopt quantum-like social science methods.

According to a widely accepted view, the Methodenstreit between the historical and Austrian school was the result of misunderstandings. Argues that it was rather the outcome of different solutions to genuine philosophical and methodological problems, in particular to a demarcation problem. Presents a reconstruction of the position of Roscher. Argues that Roscher sought to solve a demarcation problem and therefore triggered a problem situation which was of fundamental importance for further discussion. Contrasts the views of Roscher and Menger. Argues that Menger′s views constitute a direct response to Roscher′s problem situation.

Stakeholder theory may be the Archimedes lever that allows defining a possible Economy for the Common Good; however, the theory’s current level of development does not enable it to escape the criticism that considers it nothing more than shared egoism. The expansion of the concept of stakeholder, including not only groups that collaborate in the creation of value or which are actively impacted by the organisation, but also incorporating those affected by omission – non-stakeholders – would lead to the reconciliation of stakeholder theory and the common good. Nevertheless, to set it within corporate practice, besides having selfish and altruist incentives, would be of interest for the conceptual development of shapeholders, understood as the link between non-stakeholders’ interests and needs, and firms.

The purpose of this paper is to define a new and broader concept of spirituality called holistic spiritual capital (HSpC), which encompasses and identifies the dimensions proposed by various authors and to propose a metric scale for HSpC and its validation.

The analysis is based on a survey of 201 residents of Spain administered in May, 2015. Exploratory factor analysis and a subsequent confirmatory analysis were conducted using structural equation modeling (SEM) techniques with EQS software.

Four dimensions reflect the latent construct of HSpC in different ways: health, creativity, morality and religiosity.

The measurement of HSpC should be considered relevant to organizations, but not merely because it may be a tool to increase productivity. Ethical climate influenced organizational commitment and hence it enhances performance indicators.

The proposed scale encompasses in a unique instrument some dimensions considered previously in the literature independently.