Search results

This is a cry: “Let us face reality!” This article builds on Friedrich Nietzsche and argues against transcendental truth, which is the basis of spirituality. Instead, we need merely to face up to the radical contingency of life in a multi-cultured society. The rules of ethics and morality are contextual and they change over time. Standards are not found but our discourse and interaction establish them. We need to recall Promethean, who was the hero of humans against the gods and provided humans with out running start. That is really all we have but that can be enough. In public administration, we need to not look to gods, God, or spirituality; but instead we need to look to what Promethean gave us and face our intractable problems with the spirit of Promethean. We need to reject those that say they have The Truth as they seek to impose their version on us by thrusting under our arm pits crutches, which we do not need.

In this article our objective is to do a very deep analysis into biobusinesses and bioethics in order to identify holistic views concerning business enterprises in biopharmaceutical and biotechnological industries. We are arguing that biobusinesses and biotechnologies are not error free because in reality bio‐technoscientific discoveries and breakthroughs are not viewed as holistic real “natural logic”. They are “techno‐scientific logic”. Through a biosophical deliberation, if we believe that there is a difference between “natural logic” and “scientific logic”, then we may conclude that there are erroneous thoughts which exist and if existence is based on thinking, then false thoughts are as “real” as any misunderstanding among bio‐techno‐scientists and practitioners may thus end up with global catastrophes. Through a biosophical logic, we may choose both paths of “natural logic” and “scientific logic” in order to arrive in a real consensus conclusion. In addition, in this article we have examined the Promethean biosophical and biophilia perceptions and practices of global biopharmaceutical industries and biotechological businesses concerning bioethics.

This paper aims to give an account – using photographs as well as words – to describe a North American indigenous community that is retaining pre‐contact Promethean values.

The paper adopts as its approach ethnographic literature and field interviews coupled with extensive photography.

Entrepreneurship may be linked to Promethean values, a characteristic of Pueblo Indians who were imaginatively original, long before the arrival of Europeans. Since ancient times, the use of irrigation in agriculture allowed the Pueblo Indians to reside in permanent houses; these two features – sophisticated farming and settlements – resulted in these indigenous people being unlike their nomadic neighbours. Farming – as opposed to hunting – was the backbone of the Pueblo economies, and theocratic government developed to control land and water usage; complex religious ceremonies became prerequisites to harvests. Religion taught discipline, and religious values remain important. Discipline – significant in this community even today – may be the causal variable explaining Promethean over Dionysian values.

Future research might examine further differences between indigenous groups.

Regardless of how religious a person is, values perpetuated by religion can transcend to a generation that practises them less than their elders. In the case of Taos Pueblo Indians, traditional Promethean values are being perpetuated, including a highly disciplined work ethic.

The paper suggests that entrepreneurship values may be linked to traditional religion and historic innovation.

The story of the rise and influence of technology as a major force in our society is one of innovation. Technology needs to stay innovative to remain relevant and to keep adding value. The economist Schumpeter has shown us that technology moves in a creative destructive path. It is safe to say that the two, technology and innovation, are synonymous. Joseph Nadan, NYU-Poly Professor of Technology and Business Innovation, defines innovation as "people creating value by implementing new ideas." At the heart of that definition is the individual. It is also clear, that every nation and society needs more innovation and innovators to move forward and improve our economic conditions. Understanding who is an innovator and how we can create and educate more innovators is critical to the well-being of societies. To foster understanding it is useful to visualize the innovator as being on a journey. Joseph Campbell has shown us that since ancient times myths teach us profound lessons about the path of heroes that fulfill certain roles in society. One such role, the innovator, has a deep tradition in the myths of all societies. It is important to understand these myths and what lessons they teach us about the innovator's journey. By observing the characteristics of the path they follow and the motivations of the individual innovator, we are better positioned to educate innovators, to nurture them so they are productive in any organization, to recognize them when we are ready to employ them, and to clear a path for them to be innovative when they are ready to implement new ideas. Many ancient myths and stories of heroes are available to study the innovator's journey. The myth of Prometheus is one powerful example. In this paper we examine this myth and what it teaches us about the elements of the innovator's journey and the lessons we may learn to nurture innovation and innovators who benefit organizations. We will also examine how to foster the education of future innovators who, we trust, will push the frontiers of technology and contribute to its creative destructive path. We contend that innovation as a profession is just starting to be defined and that the elements of the Promethean journey can inform the conversation.

Gunther Anders in the 20th century and Hartmut Rosa in the 21st have argued that the technics of organization – that is, its physical and social technologies, have from acceleration become so uncontrollable and unpredictable that circumstances actually outstrip awareness to the degree that intentional “organizing” is more a fable than a reality, as stated in the quote from Rosa that forms the title of this article.

In this article, two critical theorists are examined who have fundamentally rejected the “control” thesis that dominates organization theory. It is a thesis that assumes that organizational change ought to be goal-directed, leadership driven and make use of soft and hard technologies to achieve defined objectives.

The prevailing “idea” of organizing has become illusionary. The technics of accelerationism have overpowered it. Not “organizing” but “ethic-sizing” is what remains as the: “What is to be done.”

The tradition of Gunther Anders and Hartmut Rosa (second and third generation Frankfurter School) and the implications of their work for our assumptions about the relations between technology, control and organization is for a first time evidenced in this article.

The purpose of this chapter is twofold. First, to show how the financial power of the fossil fuel industries and the prevalence of religious ideology in Congress are the two major obstacles preventing the U.S. government from taking action to slow down global warming. Then to evaluate various approaches to ‘satisfying our energy needs’, by showing a crucial dynamic behind our insatiable drive to consume energy, and to propose some ways of circumventing the current obstacles.

The approach is through a comprehensive study of the relevant evidence and academic literature, interwoven with philosophical reflections on their significance.

The findings are as follows: a major root of the current problem is the dysfunctional political system in the United States, which is corrupted by vast infusions of money from the fossil fuel industries and the dogmatic religious beliefs of Republicans in key positions on Congressional committees.

The implications are several. The proposed technological solutions to the ‘energy problem’ – nuclear power, carbon sequestration, fracking for natural gas and geo-engineering – only address the symptoms and ignore the dynamic that underlies them, exemplified in the story of Prometheus. If we continue to be driven by the Promethean spirit, we risk being subject to excruciating punishment as a result. The solution to our problems is a transition to clean and renewable sources of energy, accompanied by the kind of reduction in material desires that evidently makes for lives that are more fulfilled.

The value of the philosophical perspective on this topic is that it highlights questions of value that otherwise remain inexplicit.

A knowledge economy demands the ability to adapt snippets of knowledge to different situations – critical thought in another form.

This article aims at showing that the relationship between Chinese classical wisdoms and managerial practices should not be reduced to the establishment of an “art of war” applicable to management practices, but should rather be understood as an ever‐evolving work of critical reinterpretation, so as to liberate the creative and strategic potential that this tradition embodies.

It does so by critically deconstructing the question of the “relevance” of Chinese wisdom for managerial practices, by assessing the way contemporary Sinology understands and interprets the concept of “Chinese wisdom”, and by designing a strategy for applying these insights to managerial education.

It thus shows that only historical contextualization and textual studies can ground an understanding of Chinese tradition applicable to managerial education.

By doing so, it helps educators to re‐anchor managerial education into the field and methodologies of humanities studies.

It thus goes against the utilitarian and over‐simplified syntheses of Chinese thought that are currently dominant in the managerial literature about China, and proposes new ways for making the study of China a channel through which to develop in our students a sense of relativity, complexity and empathy applicable to an array of cultural contexts.

Theorists often point to social theory's normativity, but Gouldner's later works provide the most explicit, comprehensive treatment of it as post-traditional normative discourse – a practice distinct from sociology and sociological theory, yet linked historically and analytically to them. His argument about the need for a discourse space to debate social science's normative directions and to strengthen its connections to civil society is relevant today. Because Gouldner's approach has gaps and is somewhat fragmented I will reconstruct his argument about social theory per se. Although I point to problems that derive from his incomplete pragmatic turn, his approach offers an excellent departure point for discussing the meaning of social theory.

Whether like the sociologist, Herbert Marcuse, or the novelist Simone de Beauvoir, we see technology primarily as a means of human enslavement and destruction, or whether, like Adam Smith, we see it primarily as a liberating promethean force, we are all involved in its advance. (Freeman, 1974, p. 15)The initial idea informing this first ISBE Book Series was sparked by the proliferation of policy and research focused upon (a) the minority status held by women in scientific activities and discoveries around the world, (b) identifying and addressing some persisting personal, professional and institutional barriers that have continued to prevent women from entry and progression within the scientific fields and (c) attempting, but without much success, to find solutions to fix the leaks in the various joints of the so-called science, engineering, technology and mathematics (STEM) pipeline in order to remedy the current situation.