Ethical Complexity

Chapter
Part of the Issues in Business Ethics book series (IBET, volume 26)

Abstract

A distinction is often made between ontological and epistemological complexity. Useful as this distinction may be, it should be supplemented by the notion of ethical complexity. Although some initial explorations into the ethics of complexity have been made, by, for example, Cilliers, these remain primarily on a descriptive level. It is argued here that this is too lean, and should be fleshed out with narrative models which make the ethical dimension explicit. A theory of this kind of narrativity is developed from the perspective of critical hermeneutics. Arguments from Ricoeur, particularly the distinction between idem and ipse, are used to expand the notions of autopoiesis and re-entry. The notion of diapoiesis is introduced in order to highlight the relationships which constitute us as humans. This process involves a “horizontal transcendence” of which ethics forms an irreducible part. Some implications of this narrative approach for organisational ethics are spelled out.

Keywords

Good Life Personal Identity Practical Wisdom Narrative Form Ethical Complexity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the Stellenbosch Centre for Advanced Studies, of Stellenbosch University, South Africa, for their support of my work on this chapter in the spring of 2009. Special thanks to the other STIAS fellows, to the directors of the Centre for Studies in Complexity, Paul Cilliers and Jan-Hendrik Hofmeyr, and to the members of their weekly colloquium, for many stimulating conversations.

References

  1. Auerbach, E. 1953. Mimesis: Representation of reality in western literature. Princeton: Princeton University press.Google Scholar
  2. Apel, K.O. 1984. Understanding and explanation: A transcendental-pragmatic perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, M.M. 1930/1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. In M. Holquist; C. Emerson and M. Holquist (Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  4. Benhabib, S. 1992. Situating the self: Gender, community and postmodernism in contemporary ethics. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Blaffer Hrdy, S. 1999. Mother nature: A history of mothers, infants and natural selection. New York, NY: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  6. Blaffer Hrdy, S. 2009. Mothers and others: The evolutionary origins of mutual understanding. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Boje, D., Gephart, R. and Thatchenkery, T. (eds.) 1996. Postmodern management and Organization Theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Braidotti, R. 2006. Transpositions: On nomadic ethics. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Broad, C.D. 1930. Five types of ethical theory. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
  10. Buber, M. 1947/2002. Between man and man. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Czarniawska, B. 1997. Narrating the organization. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cilliers, P. 1998. Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Cilliers, P. 2004. Complexity, ethics and justice. Journal for Humanistics (Tijdschrift voor Humanistiek). 5(19): 19–26.Google Scholar
  14. Cilliers, P. 2005. Complexity, deconstruction and relativism. Theory, Culture, Society. 22(5): 255–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cilliers, P. 2008. A crisis of knowledge: Complexity, understanding and the problem of responsible action. Paper delivered at the International European Summer University 2008, 4–7 September, Niort, France.Google Scholar
  16. Damasio, A.R. 2003. Looking for Spinoza : Joy, sorrow, and the feeling brain. San Diego, CA: Harcourt.Google Scholar
  17. Damasio, A.R. 2005. Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  18. de Waal, F. 2000. Chimpanzee politics: Power and sex among apes. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
  19. de Waal, F. 2005. Our inner ape. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.Google Scholar
  20. Edelman, G.M. 1989. The remembered present: A biological theory of consciousness. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. Edelman, G.M. and Tononi, G. 2000. A universe of consciousness: How matter becomes imagination. New York, NY: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
  22. Foucault, M. 1977. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York, NY: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  23. Gabriel, Y. 2000. Storytelling in organizations. Facts, fictions and fantasies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Gabriel, Y. 2004. Myths, stories and organizations. Premodern narratives for our times. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Gadamer, H.G. 1968/1989. Truth and method. New York, NY: Crossroad.Google Scholar
  26. Habermas, J. 1971. Knowledge and human interests. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  27. Habermas, J. 1984. Theory of communicative action, Vol. 1. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hermans, H. and Kempen, H.J.G. 1993. The dialogical self: Meaning as movement. San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  29. Holland, J.H. 1995. Can there be a unified theory of complex adaptive systems? In J. Harold, H.J. Morowitz,J. Singer (eds.) The mind, the brain, and complex adaptive systems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  30. Holland, J.H. 1998. Emergence: from chaos to order. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  31. Kauffmann, S. 1995. At home in the universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Kunneman, H. 1992. Der Wahrheitstrichter. Habermas und die Postmoderne. Frankfurt a.M.: Campus.Google Scholar
  33. Kunneman, H. 2005. Voorbij het dikke-ik. Bouwstenen voor een kritisch humanisme. Amsterdam: Humanistics University Press/SWP.Google Scholar
  34. Kunneman, H. 2007. Critical humanism and the problem of evil. In H. Jansen, H.M. Vroom and J.D. Goort (eds.), Probing the depths of evil and good. Multireligous views and case studies. New York, NY: Rodopi, pp. 319–342.Google Scholar
  35. Lewontin, L. and Levins, L. 2007. Biology under the influence. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lyotard, J.F. 1998. The differend: Phrases in dispute. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  37. Maturana, H.R. and Varela, F.J. 1980. Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maturana, H.R. and Varela, F.J. 1992. The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Boston, MA: Shambhala.Google Scholar
  39. Morgan, G. 1986/2006. Images of organization. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Morin, E. 2008. On complexity. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  41. Petry, D. and Nuy, M. 1997. De ontmaskering. Amsterdam: SWP.Google Scholar
  42. Ricoeur, P. 1984. Time and narrative, Vol.1. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. Ricoeur, P. 1985. Time and narrative, Vol. 2. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  44. Ricoeur, P. 1988. Time and narrative, Vol. 3. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  45. Ricoeur, P. 1992. Oneself as another. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  46. Ricoeur, P. 2007. Evil: A challenge for philosophy and theology. Bostan, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  47. Weick, K. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University for HumanisticsUtrechtNetherlands

Personalised recommendations