On p. 160 of Understanding Management Research, Johnson & Duberley say the following:
While pragmatists would argue that how we construe the world is an outcome of social construction, they would also point to how an ontologically real external reality intervenes and imposes pragmatic limits on our discursive analyses. . .(reality forces itself upon us--Osborne)if you wanted to test this in relation to window glass, and we strongly advise you not to do this, you could try stepping through a window without opening it first and see if the postmodernist free-play of signifiers allows you to remain unharmed!
How would postmodernists respond to this practical attack on their views?
Johnson & Duberley (2000) push epistemology to be the center of management and organizational research, critiquing the manner by which more often than not, research in the area have to choose between paradigms alone, neglecting epistemological concerns (i.e. the 'nature' of management, of organizational knowledge, of the way organizational knowledge is constructed/created). In short, the authors are pushing for an assessment of the way organizational knowledge is viewed subjectively seemingly without the need to question the way the subjective views are constructed. Now, ontological studies set out to understand the true nature of things, the categories of being. While epistemology sets out to 'make sense' of reality by knowing their scope, their structure and their acquisition, ontology is an investigation into its categories or existence, its truth or falsity, it's 'being'. Epistemology is about knowledge construction whereas ontology is about 'reality'. here in the statement, the authors are saying that pragmatic views are epistemological but despite this, pragmatists also understand that there are ...
The solution is a 692-word discussion that explores the topic of postmodernist response in relation to a particular criticism of their views (see long description above/original problem). This discussion is based postmodern viewpoints and their line of reasoning when criticized for some of their views. References are listed for expansion, a word version of the solution is attached for easy printing.