NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED505562
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2009-Jun
Pages: 9
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: 20
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
The Seven Organisational Levels of Discourse
Kloprogge, Eddy; Gleeson, Peter; Clarkson, Petruska
Online Submission
This paper describes a tool for thinking and developing consciousness about the epistemology contained and revealed in our discourse about psychology and complexity theory. It is concerned with knowledge, with how we can know and with how we can sensibly speak about knowing. The model is not intended to express any values in itself and it sets no hierarchies of value either. Originally, the model offered simply a category sorting tool for thinking of the implications and ramifications of each level in terms of clarifying and preventing the kind of logical fallacies which the Oxford philosopher Ryle (1966) identified as category errors. Essentially it is phenomenological in the sense that it makes provision for the description of differentiated domains of discourse avoiding common category errors. Discourse is here defined as text or talk and discourse analysis is not so much a tool to get at empirical truths but rather a different way of conceptualising talk --"a new perspective". (Silverman 1992) The model provides a simultaneous implication of different domains of human existence alongside the different modes of discourse used and the different narratives involved. In thinking and talking about complexity, we are faced with the challenge of perceiving and discoursing upon the different domains of discourse that are involved in the attempt to capture and circumscribe the field in question. Frequently it is observed that misunderstandings are not necessarily due to intrinsic differences, but occur as result of category errors when the different truth values which apply in different domains are used indiscriminately across the various levels of discourse. No one work about complexity is complete, and the field of complexity seems to be self-organising. Different concepts emerge from within the field and at the same time, different domains of knowledge are providing a constant supply to the new formation of useful and illuminatory concepts from outside. In this vein, the paper will use as examples simultaneous categorisation of complexity concepts across the different epistemological levels (or domains). We will do that by giving examples of notions of complexity across the seven domains of discourse or experience, as well as specific examples occurring in organisational settings so that a perception can be formed of how the epistemology of complexity can lead to the creation of a useable layout of the discourses involved. In summary, the model provides a classificatory tool for identifying and separating out different layers of knowledge, different epistemological areas and the various realms of discourse and methodology concerning truth values appropriate to each.
Publication Type: Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A