The author responds to the comments by Peter and by Zinkhan and Hirschheim on his 1990 JM article, “Truth in Marketing Theory and Research.”
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonPaul F. (1983), “Marketing, Scientific Progress, and Scientific Method,” Journal of Marketing, 47 (Fall), 18–31.
2.
AndersonPaul F. (1988a), “Relative to What—That Is the Question: A Reply to Siegel,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (June), 133–7.
3.
AndersonPaul F. (1988b), “Relativism Revidivus: In Defense of Critical Relativism,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (December), 403–6.
4.
AndersonPaul F. (1989), “On Relativism and Interpretivism—With a Prolegomenon to the ‘Why Question’,” in Interpretive Consumer Research, HirschmanElizabeth C., ed. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 10–23.
5.
AngelisPeter A. (1981), Dictionary of Philosophy.New York: Barnes & Noble Publications.
6.
BarnesBarry and BloorDavid (1982), “Relativism, Rationalism and the Sociology of Knowledge,” in Rationality and Relativism, HollisM. and LukesS., eds. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
7.
BergerP. and LuckmannT. (1967), The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge.New York: Doubleday & Co., Inc.
8.
BhaskarRoy (1979), The Possibility of Naturalism.Brighton, UK: Harvester Press.
9.
BlairEdward and ZinkhanGeorge M. (1984), “The Realist View of Science: Implications for Marketing,” in Scientific Method in Marketing, AndersonP. and RyanM., eds. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 26–9.
10.
BrownHarold I. (1977), Perception Theory and Commitment.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
11.
CalderBobby J. and TyboutAlice M. (1989), “Interpretive, Qualitative, and Traditional Scientific Empirical Consumer Behavior Research,” in Interpretive Consumer Research, HirschmanElizabeth C., ed. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 199–208.
12.
DholakiaNikhilesh (1988), “Interpreting Monieson: Creative and Destructive Tensions,” Journal of Macromarketing, 8 (Fall), 11–14.
13.
FayBrian (1988), “Review of ‘A History and Philosophy of the Social Sciences’ by Peter T. Manicas,” History and Theory, 27 (3), 287–96.
14.
FeyerabendPaul K. (1978), Science in a Free Society.London: Verso.
15.
FeyerabendPaul K. (1982), “Academic Ratiofascism: Comments on Tibor Machan's Review,” Philosophy of Social Science, 12, 191–5.
16.
FeyerabendPaul K. (1987), Farewell to Reason.London: Verso.
17.
FiratFuat (1989), “Science and Human Understanding,” in AMA Winter Educators’ Conference Proceedings, ChildersT. L., eds. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 93–8.
18.
FodorJerry (1984), “Observation Reconsidered,” Philosophy of Science, 51 (March), 23–43.
19.
FodorJerry (1988), “A Reply to Churchland's ‘Perceptual Plasticity and Theoretical Neutrality’,” Philosophy of Science, 55 (June), 188–98.
20.
GilmanDaniel (1991), “Discussion: The Neurobiology of Observation,” Philosophy of Science, 58 (September), 496–502.
21.
GreenwoodJohn D. (1990), “Two Dogmas of Neo-Empiricism: The ‘Theory-Informity’ of Observation and the Quine-Duhem Thesis,” Philosophy of Science, 57 (December), 553–74.
22.
Harrison (1982), “Relativism and Tolerance,” in Relativism: Cognitive and Moral, MeilandJack W. and KrauszMichael eds. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 229–43.
23.
HuntShelby D. (1989a), “Naturalistic, Humanistic, and Interpretive Inquiry: Challenges and Ultimate Potential,” in Interpretive Consumer Research, HirschmanElizabeth C., ed. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.
24.
HuntShelby D. (1989b), “Reification and Realism in Marketing: In Defense of Reason,” Journal of Macromarketing, 9 (Fall), 4–10.
25.
HuntShelby D. (1990), “Truth in Marketing Theory and Research,” Journal of Marketing, 54 (July), 1–15.
26.
HuntShelby D. (1991 a), Modern Marketing Theory: Critical Issues in the Philosophy of Marketing Science.Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Publishing Co.
27.
HuntShelby D. (1991b), “Positivism and Paradigm Dominance in Consumer Research: Toward Critical Pluralism and Rapprochement,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (June), 32–44.
28.
HuntShelby D. (1992), “Objectivity in Marketing Theory and Research,” unpublished working paper, Texas Tech University.
KordigCarl R. (1971), The Justification of Scientific Change.Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Co.
31.
KuhnThomas S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
32.
KuhnThomas S. (1978), Black-Body Theory and the Quantum Discontinuity 1884–1912.New York: Oxford University Press.
33.
LaudanLarry (1976), “Two Dogmas of Methodology,” Philosophy of Science, 55, 25–38.
34.
LaudanLarry (1982), “Commentary: Science at the Bar—Causes for Concern,” Science, Technology, and Human Values, 7 (Fall), 16–19.
35.
LevinMichael E. (1979), “On Theory-Change and Meaning-Change,” Philosophy of Science, 46, 407–24.
36.
LevinMichael E. (1991), “The Reification-Realism-Positivism Controversy in Macromarketing: A Philosopher's View,” Journal of Macromarketing, 11 (Spring), 57–65.
37.
ManicasPeter T. (1987), A History of Philosophy of the Social Sciences.New York: Basil Black well.
38.
ManicasPeter T. and SekordP. (1983), “Implications for Psychology of the New Philosophy of Science,” American Psychologist, 38, 399–413.
39.
MobergD. W. (1979), “Are There Rival, Incommensurable Theories?” Philosophy of Science, 46, 244–62.
40.
MoniesonDavid D. (1988), “Intellectualization in Macro-marketing: A World Disenchanted,” Journal of Macromarketing, 8 (Fall), 4–10.
41.
MoniesonDavid D. (1989), “Intellectualization in Macromarketing Revisited: A Reply to Hunt,” Journal of Macromarketing, 9 (Fall), 11–16.
42.
OlsonJerry (1982), “Comments” in “Current Issues in Philosophy of Science: A Panel Discussion,” J. Paul Peter et al., in Marketing Theory: Philosophy of Science Perspectives, BushR. F. and HuntS. D., eds. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
43.
OzanneJulie L. and HudsonLaurel Anderson (1989), “Exploring Diversity in Consumer Research,” in Interpretive Consumer Research, HirschmanElizabeth C., ed. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.
44.
PeterJ. Paul and OlsonJerry C. (1983), “Is Science Marketing?” Journal of Marketing, 47 (Fall), 111–25.
45.
PhillipsD. C. (1987), Philosophy, Science, and Social Inquiry.Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
46.
PutnamHillary (1981), Reason, Truth, and History.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47.
RachelsJames (1986), The Elements of Moral Philosophy.New York: Random House.
48.
SayersBrian (1987), “Wittgenstein, Relativism, and the Strong Thesis in Sociology,” Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 17 (June), 133–45.
49.
SchefflerIsrael (1967), Science and Subjectivity.Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Co.
SchefflerIsrael (1986), Inquiries: Philosophical Studies of Language, Science, and Learning.Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
52.
ShapereDudley (1964), “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,” Philosophical Review, 73, 383–94.
53.
ShapereDudley (1982), “The Concept of Observation in Science and Philosophy,” Philosophy of Science, 49 (December), 485–525.
54.
ShapereDudley (1985), “Objectivity, Rationality, and Scientific Change,” in Proceedings of the 1984 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Volume 2, AsquithP. and KitcherP., eds. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, 637–62.
55.
SiegelHarvey (1987), Relativism Refuted.Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Co.
56.
WatkinsJohn (1984), Science and Skepticism.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
