Mapping the aliran of the academic discipline of entrepreneurship: A ...

without any reference to epistemic knowledge or ignorance.) Ontic states are the
referents of individual descriptions, the properties of the system are treated as
intrinsic prope rties. Their temporal evolution (dynamics) is reversible and follows
universal, deterministic laws. As a rule, ontic states in this sense are empirically
inaccessible.
Epistemic states describe our (usually non-exhaustive) knowledge of the properties
of a physical system, i.e. based on a finite partition of the relevant phase space. The
referents of statistical descriptions are epistemic states, the prope rties of the system
are treated as contextual prope rties. Their temporal evolution (dynamics) typically
follows phenomenological, irreversible laws. Epistemic states are, at least in
principle, empirically accessible [cited by Atmanspacher, 2001, pp50-51].
2.1.1.03 Three points are worth noting in this description. The first is the lack of reference
in an ontic state to any epistemology. The second is the infinitude knowledge of ontic
states when compared to epistemic states (which brings in Heidegger’s concept of the
finitude of knowledge). And the third point is the use of ‘contextual’ with reference to
epistemic states.
2.1.1.04 Clearly, as per Primas, there is a difference between an ontic state and an
epistemic state. It can readily be assumed that an ontic state is greater than an epistemic
state, simply due to the infinitude of knowledge, lack of need for contextual properties and
without the constraints of epistemology. Therefore in the model being developed here,
ontic knowledge, being all that is possibly contained within an ontic state, is shown as all
that included within the outer circle of Model A as shown in Graphic 2a. I have also
assumed that an ontic state does not have the constraints of time so ontic knowledge can
feasibly include future directions of knowledge and forgotten, or lost, past knowledge.
2.1.1.05 It could be asked, based on Primas’ distinction between an ontic state and an
epistemic state, whether ontology exists only in an epistemic state when an epistemology,
with its contextual prope rties and finitude of knowledge, is applied to an ontic state? Such
an existence for ontology is possible, if an ontic state and ontology are perceived
dialectically, however it seems less than likely. For a start, in the model being developed,
ontic states and ontology are considered as two different elements, as in states and
domains, that also happen to be complementary and coincide when the domains of
26