In this introductory chapter, a debate is instigated about the different ontological assumptions that scholars in the fields of management and organization make about themselves, and the consequences and implications these assumptions have in practice. In this regard, the debate is positioned in relation to one of the major conversation topics within the fields of management and organization: self-fulfilling prophecies, i.e., the phenomena in which unsubstantiated, unethical, or dysfunctional assumptions about humans can lead to adverse practical consequences. In contrast to the dominating debating tradition in academia—the eristic struggle to defeat the opponent, not for the sake of good arguments, but for the sake of the victory in itself (as sarcastically outlined by Arthur Schopenhauer)—the instigated debate follows Socrates’ somewhat forgotten maieutic tradition in which debates are seen as vehicles for advancing the speaking partner’s arguments. The eleven contributions presented in this book are therefore presented as posts in an ongoing conversation through which discursive positions on the subject are made visible, reflected upon, and (possibly could be) altered. They form a collage of ontological assumptions and practical consequences to promote self-reflexivity in a quest-like manner. It is argued that this collage entails two superimposed debates. On the one hand, a debate about the extent to which scholars in the fields of management and organization are assumed to be—and should be—independent of social pressures, normative expectations, conventions, and institutional logics; on the other hand, a debate about the extent to which scholars in the fields of management and organization are assumed to speak—and should speak—from a position endowed with obligations and privileges. Through the different ways in which the book’s contributors tackle these interrelated issues, three more or less distinct argumentative themes and ontological assumptions emerge: Homo moralis, Homo reflectivus, and Homo mutatus. These themes form the narrative structure of the book but in themselves represent heuristic devices to even further stimulate a self-reflexive debate on Homo academicus within the fields of management and organization.