What is Philosophy of Organization?

Sverre Spoelstra*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingBook chapterResearchpeer-review


Throughout the centuries philosophers have made statements that do not seem to make any sense, at least not according to the established language that we use. Examples include Spinoza’s idea that a belief in miracles ‘would lead to atheism’ (2002: 448), Bergson’s insistence that we laugh at a ‘particular mechanical arrangement’ (1911: 86), and Heidegger’s claim that ‘we are not yet capable of thinking’ (1993: 369). Or take the following (rather confusing) sentence by Deleuze: ‘a clear idea is in itself confused; it is confused in so far as it is clear’ (1994: 213). Some philosophers have even maintained that they are not philosophers at all (e.g. Arendt, Foucault), which doesn’t seem to make much sense either. Why is it that philosophers make these kinds of paradoxical statements? Are these merely unrepresentative examples? Do we need sociological, psychological, or even psychopathological theories in order to explain them? Or has this apparent nonsense something to do with the ‘essence’ of philosophy itself?
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationPhilosophy and Organization
EditorsCampbell Jones, René ten Bos
Number of pages13
Place of PublicationAbingdon
Publication date12 Apr 2007
ISBN (Print)0415371171, 041537118X , 9780415371179 , 9780415371186
ISBN (Electronic)9780203030851, 0203030850
Publication statusPublished - 12 Apr 2007
Externally publishedYes

Cite this