Theory-Pluralism in Public Administration

Abstract

Neopragmatists in public administration (PA) consistently argue that neopragmatism upgrades regular pragmatism. This claim rests on the contention that pragmatism is host to epistemic foundationalism, which undercuts legitimacy in PA. This article provides a new refutation of the upgrade claim, dissolving the hard-link constructed between epistemology and legitimacy by articulating theory-pluralism in research methods. Haack’s “Analytic Framework” is advanced as a useful conceptualization of epistemic debates in PA, and Laudan’s philosophy of science is advanced to provide a productive conceptualization of PA’s theory competition. Theory-pluralism is then applied to a variety of research areas in PA, demonstrating the need for an approach that harmonizes PA’s competing research traditions under the broader goal of problem resolution in PA.