Abstract
The words “Yes” and “No” are integral to decision-making and communication, especially in the context of workplace dynamics and clinical research. While “Yes” opens opportunities and fosters growth, “No” provides structure, ethical boundaries, and clarity. Philosophical perspectives from Sartre, Nietzsche, Luhmann, and others highlight how these responses shape individual freedom, social responsibility, and decision-making. In clinical research, both responses are crucial: “Yes” sets processes in motion, while “No” ensures ethical standards are upheld. This paper explores the interplay of “Yes” and “No” in communication and decisionmaking, arguing that a balance between the two is essential for effective, ethical practice, particularly in complex, high-stakes environments such as clinical research.
References
[1] Arendt, H. (1963). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Viking Press.
[2] Hegel, G. W. F. (1807). Phänomenologie des Geistes. Meiner Verlag.
[3] Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
[4] Kierkegaard, S. (1843). Entweder – Oder. Reclam Verlag.
[5] Luhmann, N. (1984). Soziale Systeme: Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Suhrkamp.
[6] Nietzsche, F. (1886). Jenseits von Gut und Böse. Kröner Verlag.
[7] Rousseau, J.-J. (1762). Du contrat social. Garnier-Flammarion.
[8] Sartre, J.-P. (1943). L'Être et le néant. Gallimard.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 DR. AFRIM BYTYQI (Author)