Hunt v Anderson: Round 16

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
C2a_hunt_v_anderson.pdf223.96 kBAdobe PDFDownload
Title: Hunt v Anderson: Round 16
Authors: Kavanagh, Donncha
Permanent link:
Date: 1994
Online since: 2014-08-07T13:22:48Z
Abstract: 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.
Item notes: Also published in Marketing Theory (2007) Pauline Maclaran, Mike Saren, and Mark Tadajewski (eds), Sage: London.
Type of material: Journal Article
Publisher: Emerald
Journal: European Journal of Marketing
Volume: 28
Issue: 3
Start page: 26
End page: 41
Copyright (published version): 1994 MCB University Press
Keywords: MarketingEpistemologyOntologyConsumersPhilosophyMetaphysics
DOI: 10.1108/03090569410057272
Language: en
Status of Item: Peer reviewed
Appears in Collections:Business Research Collection

Show full item record

Page view(s) 20

Last Week
Last month
checked on Jun 5, 2020

Download(s) 50

checked on Jun 5, 2020

Google ScholarTM



This item is available under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland. No item may be reproduced for commercial purposes. For other possible restrictions on use please refer to the publisher's URL where this is made available, or to notes contained in the item itself. Other terms may apply.