Overcoming Dichotomies through Space: the Contribution of Dialectical Materialism to Organization Studies

Daniel S Lacerda

doi:10.1590/1984-9230732

Abstract

One of the most debated choices in every social research design is the adoption of either a realist (objective) or an idealist (subjective) worldview of sociological problems. As argued in this paper, this dichotomy can be bridged by the dialectical approach of historical space production according to Marxist traditions in human geography. Therefore, this paper explores the philosophical grounds of this debate and previous attempts to conciliate the dichotomy and finally proposes a rejection of this dichotomy by adopting the categories of ‘space’ and ‘time’ as central in organizational analysis. Space is a historical production of social relations, and the same relations are defined in terms of their surrounding space. Thus, organization studies can benefit from a spatial view of organizations to overcome epistemological constraints by interpreting organizations as historically produced and producers of their spatial context.

Highlights

When producing scientific knowledge, researchers are required to be philosophically positioned to provide sense to their objective and justify their selected method
Peci (2004) explains that the “object vs. subject” debate is an old controversy that has been an adjunct to main sociological issues for a long time. She addresses this question by identifying three possible responses to the objectivity–subjectivity debate: 1) unilateral adoption of one or other view; 2) attempted synthesis of the objectivity– subjectivity dichotomy; and 3) rejection of the objectivity–subjectivity dichotomy. Exploring these three possibilities and their theoretical bases, this paper aims to focus on the dichotomy rejection, proposing the Marxist perspective of space production over time as an appropriate form of representing and dealing with organizations
The use of a spatiotemporal epistemology in MOS should be aligned with emancipative ontological assumptions of space

Summary

Introduction

Researchers are required to be philosophically positioned to provide sense to their objective and justify their selected method. Peci (2004) explains that the “object vs subject” debate is an old controversy that has been an adjunct to main sociological issues for a long time She addresses this question by identifying three possible responses to the objectivity–subjectivity debate: 1) unilateral adoption of one or other view; 2) attempted synthesis of the objectivity– subjectivity dichotomy; and 3) rejection of the objectivity–subjectivity dichotomy. For the first one – the unilateral solution – I will present prevailing controversies regarding similar dichotomies that are frequently tackled in Organization Theory: object vs subject, realism vs idealism, and empiricism vs rationalism Such dichotomies are to be explained in the light of their respective philosophical traditions and illustrated by sociological debates. Some theoretical implications for MOS will be drawn, summarizing the key aspects of having space and time as key analytical categories

Taking the Unilateral Position

Attempted Synthesis

Rejecting the Dichotomy

Implications for Organizations Studies

Conclusion