This document discusses the challenges of achieving context-independent communication and generalizing findings in the social sciences. It presents differing philosophical perspectives on scientific inquiry and the role of methodologies and ideologies. The document examines Habermas's concept of an "ideal speech situation" where truth could be agreed upon through discourse free of biases. It proposes testing social paradigms against empirical evidence and anchoring meanings to empirical processes to navigate complex problems. Basic social math is suggested as a way to bridge philosophical divides by informing theory with practice and vice versa.

1. Is Context-Independent
Communication Possible?
The Case for Basic Social Math
© 2012 by Jared Lee Hanson
Academy of Management Annual Meeting in Boston, Massachusetts, USA

2. Frankfurt School & the Question of Truth
“Horkheimer argued that the social sciences are different from the
natural sciences,
“inasmuch as generalizations cannot be easily made from so-called
experiences,
“because the understanding of a ‘social’ experience itself is always
fashioned by ideas that are in the researchers themselves.” (1976)*

3. Why Can’t We Generalize?

4. Philosophical Divide
“Scientific inquiry places a lot “Pragmatism distinguishes
of emphasis on method, on inquiry from research by saying
exactly how the evidence in knowledge is community based
support of a knowledge claim rather than universal....
was collected. ... if a rigorous pragmatism sees inquiry as
method is used, then the reflecting on physical events
evidence collected to support a through a variety of concepts
proposed solution will be (lenses, theories, perspectives,
thought to be ‘true’ regardless stances, viewpoints or
of who collected it or whom it ideologies).” (Metcalfe, 2008)
is presented to.” (Metcalfe, Includes: Qual/Quan Methods,
2008) Normative/Descriptive Modeling

5. Problem with Social Construction

6. Criticism from Austrian Economics
“Mises argued that numerically accurate ‘probabilities’ could never
be assigned to singular cases because the unique confluence of
events in each moment of time in real markets makes the
assignment of ‘objective’ probabilities unrealistic, as these events
are intrinsically unique and not capable of numerical probabilistic
modeling.”(1981)*
“The Austrian praxeological method is based on the heavy use of
logical deduction from what they argue to be undeniable, self-
evident axioms or irrefutable facts about human existence.”
(Hoppe, 2007)*

7. Problem in Current Methods
How can we reach any irrefutable facts about human existence?

8. Habermas on Communicating Truth
“In this version of the consensus theory of truth Habermas
maintains that truth is what would be agreed upon in an ideal
speech situation.” (1981)*
“An ‘ideal speech situation’ (in Payrow Shabani, 2003)*, requires
participants to have the same capacities of discourse, social equality
and their words are not confused by ideology or other errors. (in
Calhoun, 2002)*”

9. Lessons from Language Class

10. “Ideal Speech Situation”?
“Decision making is a fundamental particle of management” (Noonan, 2007).

11. The Need for Linguistic Rigor
How can we achieve legitimacy
in our social representations?
Illustrations of perspective in drawing (Gavin, 2010).
Cimabue, 1280 Giotto, 1310 Da Vinci, 1503-6

12. Basic Social Math
Bridging the Philosophical Divide
Testing Paradigms Against
Empirical Evidence
Anchoring Meaning to
Empirical Processes in order to
Frame and Navigate Complex
Problems
“While theory must inform praxis, praxis must also have a chance to inform theory.”
Frankfurt School*

13. Add me! facebook.com/JaredLeeHanson
Calhoun, Craig J (2002). Contemporary Sociological Theory, Wiley-Blackwell, 2002, ISBN 0-631-21350-3, p.355
Gavin (2010). “Establishing Perspective in Your Drawings.” Tutorials Plus. 10 May 2010. http://psd.tutsplus.com/tutorials/tools-
tips/establishing-perspective-in-your-drawings-basix/
Habermas, Jurgen (1981). The Theory of Communicative Action *summarized in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jürgen_Habermas, 16 July
̈
2012
Hoppe, Hans-Hermann (2007). Economic Science and the Austrian Method (Auburn, Ala.: Mises Institute, [1995] 2007), p. 63. *summarized
in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_economics, accessed on 16 July 2012.
Horkheimer, Max (1976). “Traditional and Critical Theory”. In: Connerton, P (Eds), Critical Sociology: Selected Readings, Penguin,
Harmondsworth, p. 213, *summarized in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_school, accessed on 16 July 2012.
Metcalfe, Mike (2008). “Pragmatic Inquiry”. Journal of the Operational Research Society (2008) 59, 1091–1099.
doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602443
Mises, Ludwig von (1981). http://mises.org/books/ufofes/ *summarized in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_economics, accessed
on 16 July 2012.
Noonan, Patrick S (2007). “Designing, Selling a Hybrid Course.” ORMS Today, v34 (4) 2007: 10.
Payrow Shabani, Omid A (2003). Democracy, Power and Legitimacy: The Critical Theory of Jurgen Habermas . University of Toronto Press. p.
̈
49. ISBN 0-8020-8761-2. http://books.google.com/books?ie=UTF- 8&vid=ISBN0802087612&id=tKDU3l3cq60C&pg=P A49&lpg=P
A49&dq=ideal+speech+situation.