Residues of Foundationalism in Classic Pragmatism

Abstract

The Administration & Society article titled "The Community of Inquiry" (Shields, 2003) recalled for me an article I wrote with the late Charles Fox titled "The Epistemic Community" (Miller & Fox, 2001), also published in Administration & Society. However, there was a different feel between these two articles, despite their similar titles and some similar problems in their arguments. My critique of Shields's (2003) article was an attempt to put my finger on the similarities and differences (Miller, 2004b). Judging from the reception that my criticism received (Evans, 2005;Hickman, 2004;Shields, 2004; Snider, in press;Stolcis, 2004;Webb, 2004), I must have put my finger on some kind of hot button. DOGMATISMDisagreements on questions of pragmatic philosophy should be expected. 1 In my view, pragmatism does not regard itself as a finished pronouncement but as an open, ongoing conversation. Hence, my critics have caused me to wonder about the assuredness with which some selfdescribed pragmatists are able to portray others as wrong. Shields (2004) proclaims that "Rorty and Miller got it wrong, because they misinterpreted Dewey" (p. 352). Webb ( 2004) ascribes unworthy motives to Richard Rorty in asserting that his neopragmatism "is most accurately described as an artful and selective misreading" of Dewey (p. 484). Webb adds that postmodernists are akin to "semiliterate evangelists" in the way they reference Kuhn (p. 482). Then, further expanding the scope of gratuitous abrasion, he writes that "there is no indication that Miller has direct knowledge of classical pragmatism" (Webb, 2004, p. 480). For his 360

Taming Deep Uncertainty: The Potential of Pragmatist Principles for Understanding and Improving Strategic Crisis Management

“…Over the last decade, public administration has been engaged in a lively debate about the contemporary value of Pragmatism, much of it in the pages of this journal. One axis of debate has pitted scholars drawing inspiration from classical Pragmatism (Evans, 2000(Evans, , 2005Garrison, 2000;Shields, 2003Shields, , 2005Shields, , 2008Snider, 2005;Stolcis, 2004;Webb, 2004;Whetsell, 2013) against those who identify more strongly with the neopragmatism of Richard Rorty (Kasdan, 2011(Kasdan, , 2015Miller, 2004Miller, , 2005; for an overview of similarities and differences, see Hildebrand, 2005). A second axis of debate opened with Evans (2010) and Salem and Shields (2011) arguing that Pragmatism offers a powerful alternative to logical positivism.…”

Perception of Multigrade Classes Schools: Sociology of Personalized Learning

“…Clearly, the real is an experienced or observed thing. Therefore, relativists and so centralized education supporters keep away from the ontological arguments, and so fundamentally deny the ontological questions, and so overcome epistemological concerns (Miller, 2005). Educational relativism in that sense endorses fallibilism as an alternative education of skepticism and absolutism (Facer, 2012).…”

Theory-Pluralism in Public Administration

“…Social progressivism is also a similar aim of both varieties, as is political pluralism; but theory-pluralism seems far less robust in neopragmatism, as its proponents reject theories that hint of epistemic foundationalism. For example, Miller (2005) rejects the classical pragmatism of Shields (2003) because he detects "residues of foundationalism" in her use of words such as "equity" and "efficiency" (Miller, 2004, p. 245). 4 Neopragmatists in PA are fearful of "the man of reason" who wields a dangerous sense of self-confidence and certainty in his actions derived from axiomatic (foundational) beliefs.…”

“…4. In a rather confusing manner, Miller (2005) argued, on the one hand, that "Dewey's system is indeed an attempt to construct a grand narrative, an epistemological and teleological metaphysics founded on concepts such as experience and purpose." At the same time, Miller also concedes, pragmatism is "Antifoundational, proliberal, and inclusive in a democratic way.…”