Abstract
ABSTRACT Behaviourists treat habits as thoughtlessly undertaken actions. Pragmatists, by contrast, emphasise the role intelligence plays in habit’s cultivation. Although organisational analysts have tended to prefer behavioural approaches to habit, pragmatism has been recently resurgent. This paper analyses how David Foster Wallace’s Infinite Jest dramatises this hermeneutical dichotomy. The novel, we demonstrate, represents the difference between terminal decline and lasting sobriety by opposing the fates of two characters: the suffering addict (Randy Lenz) is characterised mechanistically whereas the recovering addict (Don Gately) is characterised experientially. Infinite Jest’s fictionalisation of addiction and recovery, we claim, emphasises the saving power of pragmatism. Wallace’s novel can therefore be read as another contribution towards the ongoing recovery of pragmatism both within and beyond organisation studies.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
