Public Administration: Philosophical Analysis and Epistemic Approaches
Verified
Added on 2023/06/03
|5
|891
|255
AI Summary
This article discusses the philosophical analysis and epistemic approaches in public administration. It covers interpretivism, rationalism, empiricism, positivism, post-positivism, and postmodernism.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Running head: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION1 Public Administration Name Institution Date
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION2 Public Administration Public administration is a discipline that is concerned with the application and fulfillment of policies put in place by the government. The aim of public administration is to develop management policies for the effective functioning of government functions (Definitions.net, 2018). However, regardless of the fact that public administration has a rich theoretical heritage, few individuals still question its legitimacy. Questions arise as to whether the discipline should be referred to as a discipline or a collection of tools. However, the main point of contention has been how to study public administration and develop theories around the discipline. Philosophical Analysis. Various epistemic approaches are applicable to public administration. The approaches may range from interpretive approaches to postmodern approaches and criticisms. The epistemic approaches in focus in this paper include interpretivism, rationalism, empiricism, positivism, post-positivism, and postmodernism. Interpretivism.The interpretivism philosophy represents an aspect that focuses on meaning to bring into perspective different angles of an issue (Dudovskiy, 2018). It is based upon an interpretive nature of an issue or aspect. The conclusions made here are a reflection of the views, opinions, and perceptions of the interpretivism. The philosophy is supported by the relativist ontology and transactional or subjective epistemology beliefs. When conducting analysis on information based on interpretivism, a qualitative approach is adopted for the achievement of effective results.
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION3 Rationalism. Rationalism involves the acquisition of knowledge based on reason. Here information is derived based on intellectual and deductive senses (Markie, 2018). Rationalists tend to believe that the reality framework is composed of a logical structure. It brings into perspective the existence of some basic truths which the can be grasped by human intellect. When performing analysis on this philosophy a qualitative approach is adopted taking into consideration methods such as Meta ethical inquiry and conceptual analysis. Empiricism.In empiricism, knowledge is primarily derived from sensory experiences (Markie, 2018). It is strongly based on the evidence presented. In empiricism, all theories must be evaluated and analyzed against made observations from the standard environment. It negates observations made by reasoning, intuition, and revelation. Positivism.Positivism holds that objectivity is key in the development of knowledge. It is based upon observations that can be quantified and analyzed statistically (Dudovskiy, 2018). Positivism does not provide room for human interests in an issue. It brings into perspective the fact that there exists standard laws that are applicable universally though can be independent to the researcher. Post-positivism.Post-positivism brings into perspective that nothing is perfect. It maintains that all information and conclusions made on observation are subject to errors and inaccuracies(Riccucci, 2018). It further brings into perspective the fact that knowledge obtains its basis not from human objectives but from the conjectures of an individual. Unlike positivism which only adopts a quantitative approach to analysis, post-positivism adopts both qualitative and quantitative approaches to analysis.
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION4 Postmodernism.Postmodernism brings into perspective aspects of human thinking and critical analysis (Eagleton, 2018). It provides a provision to evaluate and critique results obtained or arrived at. It further tends to bring into perspective aspects of what can be defined as right and wrong. Postmodernism is characterized by skeptics, irony, and rejection of issues and conclusions arrived at. Social construction is a key approach to knowledge acquisition in this philosophy. A qualitative approach to analysis is very instrumental in the analysis. Conclusion All the epistemic approaches discussed, play a great role in the direction and course that public administration takes and follows. No single approach is superior to the other. One approach can prove instrumental in this particular context and another in a different context. All information obtained from the aspects discussed has a role to play in the development of the public administration discipline. References
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION5 Definitions.net. (2018, October 25).Definitions.net.Retrieved from Definitions.net: https://www.definitions.net/definition/Public%20administration Dudovskiy, J. (2018, October 25).Home: Positivism Research Philosophy.Retrieved from research-methodology.net: https://research-methodology.net/research-philosophy/positivism/ Dudovskiy, J. (2018, October 25).Research Methodology.Retrieved from Research methodology.net: https://research-methodology.net/research-philosophy/interpretivism/ Eagleton, T. (2018).The Illusions of Postmodernism.John Wiley & Sons. Markie, P. (2018, October 25).Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Retrieved from plato.stanford.edu: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/ Riccucci, N. M. (2018, 0ctober 24). Envisioning Public Adminstration as a Scholarly Field in 2020: Rethinking the Epistemic Traditions.Publib Adminstration Review, Vol.70: The Future of Public Administration in 2020, pp. S304-S306. Wiley on Behalf of the American Society for Public Administration . Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40984146