Pragmatism as Problem Solving

Abstract

At the level of sociological practice a three-sided debate occurs in American sociology between the rationalist tradition, in which the goal is the better understanding of society; the emancipatory tradition, in which the goal is improvement of society; and the skeptical tradition, which argues that we cannot know if either our knowledge or our norms are correct, and therefore it is not possible to expect progress in either. Each of these strands runs into difficulties: for the rationalist tradition, an inability to cumulate knowledge; for the emancipatory tradition, a difficulty in grounding the norms that would determine what counts as emancipation if norms are socially constructed; and for the skeptical tradition, inability to accept the logical conclusion of the argument, which is inaction even in the face of extreme injustice. The author shows that when pressed on these points, each tradition moves in the direction of pragmatism understood as problem solving, and that the practice of problem solving offers resolutions to these dilemmas.

Leveraging the insights of depth: A staged strategy for building qualitative case studies of American state‐level policy

“…In sociology, the recent move toward “problem‐solving sociology” is highly concordant with studying state politics and policy making through comparative, qualitative case studies. This paradigm encourages policy‐focused research that can aid in solving real‐world social problems (Prasad 2021). The type of research we advocate here can also help those sociologists who seek to better “speak the language” of public policymakers in hopes of producing research that can be useful and relevant to their activities (Graizbord 2019).…”

Research on Grand Challenges: Adopting an Abductive Experimentation Methodology

“…While our primary audience for the abductive experimentation process we propose is intended to be scholars studying grand challenges, we believe that such a process provides methodological insights for scholars more broadly attempting to undertake research that bridges the perceived gap between theory and practice ( Doh, 2015 ; Polzer, Gulati, Khurana, & Tushman, 2009 ; Van de Ven, 2007 ). While the philosophy of pragmatism would contend that such dualisms are both unnatural and unproductive ( Dewey, 1920 ; Simpson & den Hond, 2022 ), it is also true that the current expectations for many early-career professors are measured primarily by their ability to publish within academic journals rather than their ability to improve society ( Prasad, 2021 ). Furthermore, publishing in such top-tier academic journals typically demands both a significant contribution to academic theory as well as an incredibly high level of rigour in terms of data collection and analysis ( Ployhart & Bartunek, 2019 ).…”

“…In accordance with the philosophy of pragmatism, there is never a permanent resolution – with no need for further revisions – to questions that occur in a reality that is socially constructed and therefore continually evolving ( Morgan, 2014 ). Despite this, a pragmatist perspective does involve ‘provisional forms of closure to steer through actual debates and solve actual problems’ ( Prasad, 2021 , p. 5). Therefore, the abductive experimentation process we put forward ends not when all doubt has been extinguished, but when ‘provisional closure’ has been realized.…”

From Public Sociology to Sociological Publics: The Importance of Reverse Tutelage to Social Theory

“…Burawoy's account of the possibilities of public sociology stresses how (public) sociologists can be at the fore of working with and alongside various counter-publics, being key figures in the ongoing quest for social justice-after all, for many people, this is precisely what sociology is about (see Prasad 2021). Burawoy originally discussed such possibilities for organic public sociology in the early 2000s; in 2023, it seems as though many of his predictions have been realized.…”