Hunt v Anderson: Round 16

This paper argues that the philosophical debate in marketing, led by
Shelby Hunt and Paul Anderson, is no longer providing new insights
and is symptomatic of the anthropocentrism of the social sciences.
This anthropocentrism has had consequent implications for
metatheoretical frameworks that describe the field and has limited the
breadth of philosophical discussion in marketing. The paper argues
that this discussion should now move beyond the subject-object debate
and it identifies writers who have variously tried to transcend the
paradigm. It argues that the debate should move from epistemological
to ontological and metaphysical issues and that marketing's
philosophical discussion should also be broadened to include debate
on aesthetics, theology and technology.

Also published in Marketing Theory (2007) Pauline Maclaran, Mike Saren, and Mark Tadajewski (eds), Sage: London.