Can Yin-Yang Guide Chinese Indigenous Management Research?

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

    Resumé

    In this article, I argue that it is misleading to dichotomize the West as being either/or and the East as being both/and. The West has thought dialectically since ancient Greece. I offer a typology to compare and contrast three dialectical or non-either/or logical systems or ways of thinking: Chinese Yin-Yang philosophy, Hegel's dialectic, and Niels Bohr's complementarity principle, as well as Aristotle's formal (either/or) logic. I show that the four logical systems have differences and similarities and show that Westerners can and do think dialectically. I also argue that Chinese Yin-Yang philosophy, while useful and powerful in some situations, is not always superior to the other logical systems and philosophies. My purpose is to alert Chinese management scholars to the dangers of overconfidence and to stimulate discussion and debate on the true value of Yin-Yang in particular and the promotion of Chinese indigenous management research in general. To that end, I present my opinion on the merits and drawbacks of Yin-Yang and posit that it may inspire but cannot guide Chinese indigenous management research because Chinese philosophy lacks a well-defined methodology and operationalizable methods.
    OriginalsprogEngelsk
    TidsskriftManagement and Organization Review
    Vol/bind10
    Udgave nummer1
    Sider (fra-til)7-27
    ISSN1740-8776
    DOI
    StatusUdgivet - 2014

    Emneord

    • Chinese
    • Dialectic
    • Indigenous
    • Management research
    • Overconfidence
    • Yin-Yang

    Citer dette

    @article{c09a4f63ea45417fafc4229d19bc0591,
    title = "Can Yin-Yang Guide Chinese Indigenous Management Research?",
    abstract = "In this article, I argue that it is misleading to dichotomize the West as being either/or and the East as being both/and. The West has thought dialectically since ancient Greece. I offer a typology to compare and contrast three dialectical or non-either/or logical systems or ways of thinking: Chinese Yin-Yang philosophy, Hegel's dialectic, and Niels Bohr's complementarity principle, as well as Aristotle's formal (either/or) logic. I show that the four logical systems have differences and similarities and show that Westerners can and do think dialectically. I also argue that Chinese Yin-Yang philosophy, while useful and powerful in some situations, is not always superior to the other logical systems and philosophies. My purpose is to alert Chinese management scholars to the dangers of overconfidence and to stimulate discussion and debate on the true value of Yin-Yang in particular and the promotion of Chinese indigenous management research in general. To that end, I present my opinion on the merits and drawbacks of Yin-Yang and posit that it may inspire but cannot guide Chinese indigenous management research because Chinese philosophy lacks a well-defined methodology and operationalizable methods.",
    keywords = "Chinese, Dialectic, Indigenous, Management research, Overconfidence, Yin-Yang",
    author = "Xin Li",
    year = "2014",
    doi = "10.1111/more.12042",
    language = "English",
    volume = "10",
    pages = "7--27",
    journal = "Management and Organization Review",
    issn = "1740-8776",
    publisher = "Wiley",
    number = "1",

    }

    Can Yin-Yang Guide Chinese Indigenous Management Research? / Li, Xin.

    I: Management and Organization Review, Bind 10, Nr. 1, 2014, s. 7-27.

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Can Yin-Yang Guide Chinese Indigenous Management Research?

    AU - Li, Xin

    PY - 2014

    Y1 - 2014

    N2 - In this article, I argue that it is misleading to dichotomize the West as being either/or and the East as being both/and. The West has thought dialectically since ancient Greece. I offer a typology to compare and contrast three dialectical or non-either/or logical systems or ways of thinking: Chinese Yin-Yang philosophy, Hegel's dialectic, and Niels Bohr's complementarity principle, as well as Aristotle's formal (either/or) logic. I show that the four logical systems have differences and similarities and show that Westerners can and do think dialectically. I also argue that Chinese Yin-Yang philosophy, while useful and powerful in some situations, is not always superior to the other logical systems and philosophies. My purpose is to alert Chinese management scholars to the dangers of overconfidence and to stimulate discussion and debate on the true value of Yin-Yang in particular and the promotion of Chinese indigenous management research in general. To that end, I present my opinion on the merits and drawbacks of Yin-Yang and posit that it may inspire but cannot guide Chinese indigenous management research because Chinese philosophy lacks a well-defined methodology and operationalizable methods.

    AB - In this article, I argue that it is misleading to dichotomize the West as being either/or and the East as being both/and. The West has thought dialectically since ancient Greece. I offer a typology to compare and contrast three dialectical or non-either/or logical systems or ways of thinking: Chinese Yin-Yang philosophy, Hegel's dialectic, and Niels Bohr's complementarity principle, as well as Aristotle's formal (either/or) logic. I show that the four logical systems have differences and similarities and show that Westerners can and do think dialectically. I also argue that Chinese Yin-Yang philosophy, while useful and powerful in some situations, is not always superior to the other logical systems and philosophies. My purpose is to alert Chinese management scholars to the dangers of overconfidence and to stimulate discussion and debate on the true value of Yin-Yang in particular and the promotion of Chinese indigenous management research in general. To that end, I present my opinion on the merits and drawbacks of Yin-Yang and posit that it may inspire but cannot guide Chinese indigenous management research because Chinese philosophy lacks a well-defined methodology and operationalizable methods.

    KW - Chinese

    KW - Dialectic

    KW - Indigenous

    KW - Management research

    KW - Overconfidence

    KW - Yin-Yang

    U2 - 10.1111/more.12042

    DO - 10.1111/more.12042

    M3 - Journal article

    VL - 10

    SP - 7

    EP - 27

    JO - Management and Organization Review

    JF - Management and Organization Review

    SN - 1740-8776

    IS - 1

    ER -