A Story about a Message that was a Story: Message Form and its Implications to Knowledge Flow

Knowledge Flow, my dear friend! I would like to introduce you to a close relative of yours: Organizational Communication. You might want to take a moment to hear what your newfound kin has to say. As bright as you are dear Flow, you're missing a piece of the puzzle - for one cannot study any aspect of an organization relating to communication without acknowledging the message. Without a message, communication does not exist. Organizational Communication has always appreciated this. Perhaps the time has come for you to join rank and do so too? The main point of this work is to prove that the form of a message considerably affects communication, interpretation - and knowledge flow. As stories are at the heart of this thesis; and entertaining, reader-friendly communication its main argument, the entire manuscript is written in story form and is intentionally breaking academic writing tradition as far as writing style goes. Each chapter reads as a story of sorts and put together they create a grand narrative of my journey as a PhD student, the research I have conducted and the outcomes of this work. Thus if a reader hopes to make any sense of this title, she must read it in the same way one would read a novel, from beginning to end. This is a thesis with three aspirations. First, it sets out to prove that knowledge flow cannot be studied without a message. Second, it moves on to give the reader a once-over of a much used message form: storytelling. After these two goals are tackled the path is clear to research if message form indeed is as essential as claimed. I do so through both a qualitative and a quantitative study. The former acted as both a stepping stone into the research area and as an inspirational pilot, from which the research design for the larger quantitative study was drawn. Together, these two studies answered my research question - and allowed me to fulfill the third, final and foremost aspiration of this study - bridging the gap between two separate fields of knowledge management: knowledge flow and storytelling.

Proofs, Paradoxes, and Probabilities : The Logical Turn of Philosophy in Finland

This monograph describes the emergence of independent research on logic in Finland. The emphasis is placed on three well-known students of Eino Kaila: Georg Henrik von Wright (1916-2003), Erik Stenius (1911-1990), and Oiva Ketonen (1913-2000), and their research between the early 1930s and the early 1950s. The early academic work of these scholars laid the foundations for today's strong tradition in logic in Finland and also became internationally recognized. However, due attention has not been given to these works later, nor have they been comprehensively presented together. Each chapter of the book focuses on the life and work of one of Kaila's aforementioned students, with a fourth chapter discussing works on logic by authors who would later become known within other disciplines. Through an extensive use of correspondence and other archived material, some insight has been gained into the persons behind the academic personae. Unique and unpublished biographical material has been available for this task. The chapter on Oiva Ketonen focuses primarily on his work on what is today known as proof theory, especially on his proof theoretical system with invertible rules that permits a terminating root-first proof search. The independency of the parallel postulate is proved as an example of the strength of root-first proof search. Ketonen was to our knowledge Gerhard Gentzen's (the 'father' of proof theory) only student. Correspondence and a hitherto unavailable autobiographic manuscript, in addition to an unpublished article on the relationship between logic and epistemology, is presented. The chapter on Erik Stenius discusses his work on paradoxes and set theory, more specifically on how a rigid theory of definitions is employed to avoid these paradoxes. A presentation by Paul Bernays on Stenius' attempt at a proof of the consistency of arithmetic is reconstructed based on Bernays' lecture notes. Stenius correspondence with Paul Bernays, Evert Beth, and Georg Kreisel is discussed. The chapter on Georg Henrik von Wright presents his early work on probability and epistemology, along with his later work on modal logic that made him internationally famous. Correspondence from various archives (especially with Kaila and Charlie Dunbar Broad) further discusses his academic achievements and his experiences during the challenging circumstances of the 1940s.