洞见之中必有修辞 ――作为方法的论辩
Rhetoric？？Loaded Insight ― Argumentation as Method

针对目前管理学研究中过分强调科学形式而忽略研究洞见的现象,韩巍指出《管理学中的伟大思想》中很多思想观点的提出并没有遵循严格的科学形式,甚至认为过分强调科学形式反而会阻碍研究洞见的产生,因此“洞见以下皆为修辞”。本文对科学形式主义同样持批判态度,但批判思路有所不同,主要回答了两个问题:一是遵循科学形式的研究,其研究结论是否一定科学、合理;二是论辩作为一种研究方法,如何系统地开展以最大可能地获得科学合理的研究结论。对第一个问题的回答,一方面指出研究洞见的缺乏不能完全归咎于科学形式;另一方面指出,根据不充分决定性论题,科学形式并不是研究结论科学合理的充分条件。对第二个问题的回答则给出了解决之道,即通过系统性的论辩最大可能地获得科学合理的研究结论。
HAN Wei (2017) in his recent article, Insight Is Much More Important than Rhetoric, he criticized the management academy’s preference for scientific formalism. He argued that insights should be valued higher than scientific forms. We agree with professor HAN on this point. What we do not agree is the line of reasoning through which this conclusion is obtained. We should pay more attention to the problem of lack of insight in current management research. However, it is not all scientific formalism’s fault, because there is no fixed rule to gain insights. We criticize scientific formalism from a different perspective, the underdetermination thesis. According to the underdetermination thesis, although a piece of research has a good scientific form, it cannot guarantee the research conclusion is reasonable. We further argue that to make a research conclusion as reasonable as possible, systematic argumentation is highly needed and it should be viewed as a fundamental research method