Purpose: Asking whether we should regard the learning organization as a tautology and, thus, of questionable utility, the purpose of this paper is to assess the ur-definition of the concept furnished by Senge. It seeks to demonstrate, particularly to those unaware of a textual-analytic approach, how claims that have academic authority can have poor explanatory power, with attendant risks. Design/methodology/approach: Using a post-structuralist methodology, by illuminating unarticulated assumptions and questioning bald assertions, this paper exposes sub-textual bias and a lack of rigour characterizing the prescription of the learning organization. This legitimizes alternative and more inclusive narratives. Findings: This paper finds the learning organization furthering a managerialist interest under the guise of enabling the achievement of employee's and employees' desires. As such, it is in the tradition of improvement-offering management fashions. In offering the promise of a sort of liberation for employees, it ignores and facilitates systemic dysfunctions, both internal and external. Originality/value: By introducing the suggestion that the learning organization might be usefully interrogated as a paralogism, this paper encourages a critical appreciation of learning, not as an unalloyed good but as a potentially repressive tool. A fortiori, the learning organization.