Controversy in Marketing Theory: For Reason, Realism, Truth and Objectivity

For Reason, Realism, Truth and Objectivity

Shelby D. Hunt

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781315290874
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

In this book distinguished theorist and author Shelby D. Hunt analyzes the major controversies in the "philosophy debates" raging throughout the field of marketing. Using an historical approach, Hunt argues against relativism and for scientific realism as a philosophy for guiding marketing research and theory. He also shows how the pursuit of truth and objectivity in marketing research are both possible and desirable. Specific controversies analyzed in the book include: Does positivism dominate marketing research? Does positivism imply quantitive methods? Is relativism an appropriate foundation for marketing research? Does relativism imply pluralism, tolerance, and openness? Should marketing pursue the goal of objective research? An ideal companion to Hunt's classic text, Foundations of Marketing Theory, this volume will be equally useful on its own in any graduate level course on marketing theory.

1
INTRODUCTION

---

Science is, above all else, a reality-driven enterprise. Every active investigator is inescapably aware of this. It creates the pain as well as much of the delight of research. Reality is the overseer at one’s shoulder, ready to rap one’s knuckles or to spring the trap into which one has been led by overconfidence, or by a too-complacent reliance on mere surmise. Science succeeds precisely because it has accepted a bargain in which even the boldest imagination stands hostage to reality.

—Paul R. Gross and Norman Levitt (1994)

Controversy in marketing theory is longstanding. In the early part of the twentieth century, marketers debated whether their subject should be approached from the perspective of marketing functions, commodities, or institutions (Bartels 1976). Those advocating the functional approach prevailed, and most early textbooks stressed the activities that were believed to be the essential components of all marketing systems. Later, controversy in marketing theory centered on questions such as: (1) Should marketing be taught from a managerial rather than a functional perspective? (2) Should marketing be guided by the marketing concept? (3) Is marketing (can it be) a science? (4) What is the role of theory in marketing research? (5) Should (can) marketing have its own general theory? (6) Should marketing theory be developed deductively or inductively? (7) Are marketing laws (or lawlike generalizations) possible? (8) What does it mean to explain a marketing phenomenon? (9) Is marketing an applied discipline? (10) Who are the clients of the marketing discipline? (11) Can (should) marketing be broadened to include nonprofit organizations? (12) What is the role of strategy in marketing research? (See Kerin 1996.)

This book is titled Controversy in Marketing Theory. Yet the controversies referred to in the title are not the dozen just cited. Instead, the controversies are those, often referred to collectively as the “philosophy debates,” that arose in the early 1980s and continue in many different guises today (e.g., controversies in marketing involving relativism, postmodernism, interpretivism, humanism, and feminism) (Easton 2002). Examples of specific controversies in the philosophy debates include: (1) Does science (and, therefore, marketing science) differ from nonscience in any fundamental way (or ways)? (2) Does “positivism” (i.e., logical positivism and logical empiricism) dominate marketing research? (3) Does positivism imply quantitative methods? (4) Would positivist research be causality-seeking, adopt the machine metaphor, adopt realism, be deterministic, reify unobservables, and adopt functionalism? (5) What is philosophical relativism? (6) Is relativism an appropriate foundation for marketing research? (7) Does relativism imply pluralism, tolerance, and openness? (8) Should qualitative methods (e.g., naturalistic inquiry, humanistic inquiry, ethnographic methods, historical method, critical theory, literary explication, interpretivism, feminism, and postmodernism) be more prominent in marketing research? (9) Do qualitative methods imply relativism? (10) What is the philosophy known as “scientific realism”? (11) Is scientific realism an appropriate foundation for marketing research? (12) Are true theories, as emphasized by realism, an appropriate goal for marketing research? (13) Is objective research in marketing possible? (14) Should marketing pursue the goal of objective research?¹

The controversies addressed in this book that prompt its title are those that have been prominent and contentious in marketing’s philosophy debates. Our analyses of the controversies will reflect the subtitle of the book; they reflect what the book argues for. That is, this work’s analyses of the controversies argue for Reason, Realism, Truth, and Objectivity. This book argues for a reasoned approach to marketing’s controversies, for realism as a foundation for marketing theory and research, and for truth and objectivity as goals for marketing to pursue and regulative ideals for marketing to maintain. These “fors,” in turn, stem from the foundations of the philosophy underlying our method of analysis. These foundations are seven (Hunt 2001).

First, the book’s philosophical foundations hold that Plato’s “critical discussion” (see section 2.1.2) is essential for knowledge development. In this view, the pursuit of truth is furthered by proposing penetrating, highly critical questions, which are to be followed by equally insightful, thoughtful answers. Second, civility in critical discussion is a virtue. For example, the use of ad hominem is proscribed: Discussion should always be directed at the ideas of people, not at the people themselves. Third, the use of sophistry is prohibited: It is impermissible to employ disingenuous argumentation, even when such arguments might be persuasive to one’s audience. Fourth, one should respect reason and evidence: The fallibility of all research methods implies that one must be open to all alternative views that provide well-reasoned arguments and evidence. Fifth, clarity in scholarship is a virtue: To be obscure should never be confused with being profound. Sixth, of all the “isms” in the philosophy of science, scientific realism seems to make the most sense for marketing: No other philosophy is coherent (without being dogmatic), is critical (without being nihilistic), is open (without being anarchistic), and, at the same time, can account for the success of science.

Seventh, and finally, the philosophy underlying this work emphasizes critical pluralism. “Critical pluralism” is a label originally suggested by Siegel (1988) to characterize how scholars should view their own and others’ theories and methods. The “pluralism” part reminds us that dogmatism is antithetical to science; we should adopt a tolerant, open posture toward new theories and methods. The “critical” half stresses that nonevaluational, nonjudgmental, or noncritical pluralism (which would view the supposed encapsulation of rival theories and alternative methods as thwarting comparison and evaluation) is just as bad as dogmatism. All methods, theories, and their respective knowledge claims can (and must) be subjected to critical scrutiny; nothing is exempt. Critical pluralism, therefore, implies that the philosophy underlying the book is open-minded, but not empty-headed.

1.1 THE BASIC THESIS

The basic thesis of this book is that marketing’s philosophy debates—like those in the social sciences, as discussed in Fiske and Shweder (1986) and Phillips (1987)—have been (and are) muddled, at least in part, because they have been uninformed as to the “isms” of the philosophy of science. That is, the debates are less productive than they might be if the debates’ participants understood the nature of, and differences among, logical positivism, logical empiricism, historical relativism, historical empiricism, and scientific realism. However, understanding these “isms” requires at least some understanding of their historical predecessors, that is, idealism, classical rationalism, classical realism, classical positivism, and classical empiricism. Therefore, Chapters 2 through 5 adopt a qualitative method, that is, historical method, to explicate the philosophical “isms” that have figured, and continue to figure, so prominently in marketing’s philosophy debates. As shown in Figure 1.1, the relevant “isms” begin with Platonism, which traces to 600 B.C., and culminate in today’s historical empiricism and scientific realism.

The objectives of Chapters 2 through 5 are to provide an initial analysis of some of the controversies in the philosophy debates, and to develop the historical groundwork for detailed examination of the debates in Chapters 6 through 9. Furthermore, Chapters 2 through 5 provide readers with historical references and other materials that would be useful for future analyses of philosophical controversies in marketing. As readers will note, the analyses in Chapters 6 through 9 will refer extensively to the historical materials in Chapters 2 through 5 (often by section number).

Figure 1.1Philosophy of Science Time Chart

1.2 A LOOK AHEAD

Chapter 2 traces the history of the philosophy of science and the scientific method from its Grecian origins with Platonism to the latter part of the nineteenth century and the triumph of German idealism. Specifically, the chapter discusses Platonism; the rise of modern science in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; the classical empiricism of Bacon, Locke, Hume, and Mill; the rationalism of Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz; the ascendence of idealism, as argued for by Berkeley, Kant, and Hegel; and the classical positivism of Conte and Mach, before concluding with a discussion of the methodological contributions of Frege. As will be discussed in Chapter 2, Socrates, in his debate with the sophists, developed a version of the “self-refutation” argument against relativism that modern philosophers of science also find useful in evaluating relativism.

Source: Hunt (2002b). Reprinted by permission of the author.

Chapter 3 begins with the emergence of classical realism, as argued for by Moore, Russell, and Wittgenstein. The chapter then turns to the origins of the logical positivist movement and shows how it was stimulated by developments in Einsteinian relativity and quantum mechanics. The chapter then discusses the flaws in the logical positivists’ research program and how those flaws led to the development of logical empiricism and Popperian falsificationism. The chapter concludes with discussions of scientific progress, scientific knowledge, the doctrine of foundationalism, and the philosophers’ fallacy.

Chapter 4 chronicles the rise and fall of historical relativism in the philosophy of science. First, the chapter distinguishes between relativism and absolutism. After identifying the various kinds of relativism, the chapter discusses and evaluates both Kuhnian relativism and the relativism of Feyerabend. Finally, the chapter speculates as to why relativism was so enthusiastically, almost unthinkingly, embraced in the 1960s.

Chapter 5 discusses the three major post-relativistic philosophies of science. These include two kinds of historical empiricism, that of Lakatos and the version of Laudan. Although both versions of historical empiricism are shown to have merit, both versions are shown to be plagued with fatal flaws. Chapter 5 then introduces the philosophy of scientific realism and shows how it can accommodate the success of science.

Chapter 6 begins the specific analyses of controversies in the philosophy debates in marketing. First, the chapter evaluates the “nature of science” controversy. It is shown that, despite marketing’s relativists not wishing to embrace nihilistic conclusions regarding science, their premises imply nihilism. The chapter then discusses “weak-form” relativism and shows how it, also, fails the test of reason. Chapter 6 then turns to the positivism versus qualitative methods controversy. Positivism is shown not to be the same thing as quantitative methods. Likewise, positivist research is shown not to imply the search for causal explanations, not to be guided by the machine metaphor, not to have a realist view with respect to scientific theories, not to be guilty of reification, and not to be functionalist in its view of explanations. The chapter concludes that marketing is not dominated by either logical positivism or logical empiricism. Therefore, the “positivism versus qualitative methods” controversy has been muddled, at least in part, because the controversy has a demonstrably false, initial premise.

Chapter 7 evaluates the controversy regarding truth in marketing theory and research. First, the chapter discusses the nature of truth, and how scientific realism maintains that truth is (1) not an entity, (2) not known with certainty, and (3) not equal to pragmatic success. The chapter then introduces the concept of relativistic truth, and evaluates the various relativist arguments maintaining that marketing should abandon the goal of truth in theory and research. It is found that those who argue against truth, among other things, commit the philosophers’ fallacy. After discussing the concept of relativistic reality, the chapter concludes that trust provides a major reason for maintaining the pursuit of truth as a major objective of marketing theory and research.

Chapter 8 evaluates the controversy over objectivity in marketing research. First, after discussing the nature of objectivity, the concept of objectivity is distinguished from objectivism. Then, the issue of whether the social sciences are inherently subjective is analyzed. After discussing the historical relativist view of objectivity, five different relativist arguments against objectivity are reviewed and analyzed. The results show that there is no reason to believe that objective marketing research is not possible. Finally, the positive case for objectivity in marketing research is pu...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Natural Philosophy and the Rise of Science: From Plato to Hegel
• 3 The Development of the Philosophy of Science Discipline: From Classical Realism to Logical Empiricism
• 4 The Rise and Fall of Historical Relativism in Philosophy of Science
• 5 Post-Relativistic Philosophy of Science
• 6 On Science, Qualitative Methods, and Marketing Research
• 7 On Truth and Marketing Research
• 8 On Objectivity and Marketing Research
• 9 On Scientific Realism and Marketing Research
• References
• Index