Rethinking Epistemic Traditions: Public Administration Review Analysis

This essay provides a philosophical analysis of public administration, exploring various epistemic approaches relevant to the discipline. It delves into interpretivism, rationalism, empiricism, positivism, post-positivism, and postmodernism, highlighting their unique characteristics and analytical approaches. The essay emphasizes that each approach contributes to the development of public administration, with no single approach being superior. It concludes that the information derived from each perspective plays a crucial role in shaping the field, referencing Norma M. Riccucci's work on rethinking epistemic traditions in public administration.

Running head: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 1
Public Administration
Name
Institution
Date

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 2
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 ADMINISTRATION 3
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 ADMINISTRATION 4
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

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 5
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