Three Dogmas: A Rejoinder

Abstract

Offers a reply to Trevor Maddock′s philosophical critique of the authors′ work. Contains a brief summary of the authors′ research programme, located within a perspective on philosophy of educational administration, a series of short responses to some minor criticisms and a number of more extended replies to major criticisms. Defends the authors′ view that a science is quite broad because the adjudication of competing scientific theories is conducted according to coherentist criteria. Also defends a naturalistic view of ethics, thus locating moral judgement on the same explanatory agenda as other judgements an administrator might make about decisions and choices concerning organizational life.

Citation

Evers, C.W. and Lakomski, G. (1994), "Three Dogmas: A Rejoinder", Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 28-37. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578239410069098