Reflections on phronetic social science: a dialogue between Stewart Clegg, Bent Flyvbjerg and Mark Haugaard

Clegg, S; Flyvbjerg, B; Haugaard, M

Reflections on phronetic social science: a dialogue between Stewart Clegg, Bent Flyvbjerg and Mark Haugaard

Clegg, S

Flyvbjerg, B Haugaard, M

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Journal of Political Power, 2014, 7 (2), pp. 275 - 306
Issue Date:: 2014-01-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted ManuscriptAdobe PDF (311.47 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Clegg, S https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6083-4283	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Flyvbjerg, B	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Haugaard, M	en_US
dc.date.issued	2014-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Journal of Political Power, 2014, 7 (2), pp. 275 - 306	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	2158-379X	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/33519
dc.description.abstract	Clegg, Flyvbjerg and Haugaard debate the strengths and weaknesses of a Foucauldian-Nietzschean critique of power compared to a tradition exemplified by Lukes and Habermas. Flyvbjerg and Clegg argue that the pursuit of universal normative principles and of rationality without power may lead to oppressive utopian thinking. Drawing on the Aristotelian tradition of phronesis, they propose a contextualist form of critique that situates itself in analysis of local practices to render domination transparent and open to change. While Haugaard accepts there cannot be a universal view that transcends the particularities of context, he argues that the phronetic approach is crypto-normative because it implicitly presupposes unacknowledged liberal normative premises; moreover, any use of 'truth' as a criterion follows Enlightenment principles of verification. © 2014 Taylor & Francis.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Journal of Political Power	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1080/2158379X.2014.929259	en_US
dc.title	Reflections on phronetic social science: a dialogue between Stewart Clegg, Bent Flyvbjerg and Mark Haugaard	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	2	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	7	en_US
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management	en_US
utslib.for	1606 Political Science	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business/Management Discipline
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.issue	2	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	7	en_US

Abstract:

Clegg, Flyvbjerg and Haugaard debate the strengths and weaknesses of a Foucauldian-Nietzschean critique of power compared to a tradition exemplified by Lukes and Habermas. Flyvbjerg and Clegg argue that the pursuit of universal normative principles and of rationality without power may lead to oppressive utopian thinking. Drawing on the Aristotelian tradition of phronesis, they propose a contextualist form of critique that situates itself in analysis of local practices to render domination transparent and open to change. While Haugaard accepts there cannot be a universal view that transcends the particularities of context, he argues that the phronetic approach is crypto-normative because it implicitly presupposes unacknowledged liberal normative premises; moreover, any use of 'truth' as a criterion follows Enlightenment principles of verification. © 2014 Taylor & Francis.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/33519