The purpose of the paper is to start a dialogue about differences between Western and Eastern cultures in the way they conceptualize knowledge and discuss the implications of these differences for a global intellectual capital (IC) theory and practice. A systematic metaphor analysis of the concept of knowledge and IC is used to identify common Western conceptualizations of knowledge in IC literature. A review of philosophical and religious literature was done to identify knowledge conceptualizations in the main streams of Asian philosophy. Fundamental differences were found in the way knowledge is conceptualized. In Western IC literature common metaphors for knowledge include knowledge as a thing and knowledge as capital. In Asian thought, knowledge is seen as unfolding truth based upon a unity of universe and human self and of knowledge and action. The research was performed on a limited sample of literature. More research is needed to identify how knowledge is conceptualized in the practice of doing business in Asia and to test the effects of introducing IC theories to Asian businessmen and managers. Moreover, it might be questionable whether different types of resources (Western management literature on IC and Asian cultural philosophies) can be put in a comparative perspective to extract conclusions out of it. This methodological starting point has its confinements, but is plausible partly as long as IC theories originating from an Asian background are still missing, partly as far as philosophical notions within Western IC publications are contrasted with Asian notions of knowledge. Despite this restriction we would like to emphasize that Western conceptualizations of knowledge, embedded in terms like intellectual capital and knowledge management, can not be transferred to Asian business without considering the local view on knowledge. Asian conceptualizations of knowledge should play an important role in the further development of a knowledge-based theory and practice of the firm. We choose deliberately to contrast Western philosophy with cultural and religious connotations in Asian philosophy, as the underlying paradigm is strongly influenced by these notions. This is clearly perceivable in revivalist and reformist tendencies in Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam. Religious notions within these traditions have a strong paradigmatic function in a cognitive and normative sense. Not only in anthropology but also in epistemology, contemporary Asian thought is dominated by a discourse deeply embedded in religious and cultural traditions, in which the dimensions of 'nature', 'subjectivity' and 'history' have well defined boundaries. Anthropologically and epistemologically, all spheres of human reality are analyzed and described within the perspective of an integral and monolithic unity, in which all dimensions and spheres of being are bound. In Western philosophy these spheres of being have been separated from religious notions because of a longstanding secularization due to which religion and culture, metaphysics and philosophy have become separate disciplines.(Boom, 1993)
Ulus Baker (1960 – 2007) was a Turkish-Cypriot sociologist, philosopher, and public intellectual. He was born in Ankara, Turkey in 1960. He studied Sociology at Middle East Technical University in Ankara, where he taught as a lecturer until 2004. Baker wrote prolifically in influential Turkish journals and made some of the first Turkish translations of various works of Gilles Deleuze, Antonio Negri, and other contemporary political philosophers. His profuse and accessible work and the novelty of the issues he enthusiastically introduced to Turkish-speaking intellectual circles, earned him a widely spread positive reputation in early age. He died in 2007 in Istanbul.The text in this edition is edited from essays and notes Ulus Baker wrote between 1995 and 2002. In these essays, Baker criticizes the sociological research turning into an analysis of people’s opinions. He explores with an exciting clarity the notion of ‘opinion’ as a specific form of apprehension between knowledge and point of view, then looks into ‘social types’ as an analytical device deployed by early sociologists. He associates the form of ‘comprehension’ the ‘social types’ postulate with Spinoza’s notion of ‘affections’ (as a dynamic, non-linguistic form of the relation between entities). He finally discusses the possibilities of reintroducing this device for understanding our contemporary world through cinema and documentary filmmaking, by reinstating images in general as ‘affective thought processes’.Baker’s first extensive translation to English provides us with a much-needed intervention for re-imagining social thought and visual media, at a time when sociology tends to be reduced to an analysis of ‘big data’, and the pedagogical powers of the image are reduced to data visualization and infographics.
MULTIFILE
