Abstract
Someone reading the Management, Spirituality, and Religion (MSR) literature for the first time could readily conclude that spirituality is a “good” thing and that religion is a “bad” thing. This supposed polarity, and other definitional “muddiness,” represent a lifecycle stage of academic literature that can be transcended by the introduction and explication of starting axioms by MSR scholars. For example, one’s “religion,” as the word is commonly defined, is simply the collection of beliefs that she accepts that cannot be derived from other established elements of her belief system. In other words, everyone chooses a starting set of axioms or assumptions, and that choice can be said to be that person’s religion. This chapter next analyzes some starting axioms of a number of common religions such as atheist objectivism, Christianity, secular humanism, Buddhism, and Hinduism. Although none of these sets of starting assumptions can be proven to be more fundamental than any other, these religions can be compared using criteria such as logical consistency and empirical adequacy. Finally, as a strategy for more effectively and rapidly advancing the field of MSR, this chapter proposes that the MSR community elevate the scholarship to MSR 2.0, a markedly “upgraded” literature that would include definitional clarity and explicit starting axioms. The MSR community should consider embracing the evidence-based management (EBM) approach which allows for a wide range of methodologies, provided that evidence is presented.
This chapter points out some “muck” that the Management, Spirituality, and Religion (MSR) literature is mired in and to suggest that the explication of starting axioms will allow the field to take a quantum leap forward to “MSR 2.0.” It introduces a standard definition of religion and show how it is essentially synonymous with a belief system. The chapter intends to be persuasive in suggesting that everyone operates with a belief system that contains unproven starting axioms. If the term religion has been overly provocative, paradigm, weltanschauung, narrative identity, worldview, philosophy, or related terms can be substituted. The chapter shows how MSR research has been conducted, rather than a topic such as spirituality, so these foundational assumptions will be quite different from an article about religion, spirituality, mindfulness, and so forth.