Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-04T05:39:47.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Old—and New—Policy Analysis: A Pragmatic Re-Assessment from Dewey to 9/11

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2011

Fabrizio Cantelli
Fabrizio Cantelli*
Affiliation:
Université Libre de Bruxelles
*
Fabrizio Cantelli, F.N.R.S, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Groupe de recherche sur l'action publique (GRAP), Department of Political Science, Institut de Sociologie, Avenue Jeanne, 44 (CP 124), 1050 Brussels, Belgium, fcantell@ulb.ac.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Pragmatism is not new. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the pragmatic movement, embodied in such American authors as Charles Peirce (1839–1914), William James (1842–1910) and John Dewey (1859–1952), has developed various philosophical works and has been engaged in several theoretical disputes as well as political debates. Yet does pragmatism form part of only an American sensibility? Does it belong only to the past? This review essay will argue to the contrary. We will see to what extent pragmatism provides fruitful potential and inspiration for contemporary policy analysis in the United States and in Europe. This review essay will discuss actual issues and challenges within pragmatism by providing a critical reading of two recent books: Pragmatism and European Social Theory, edited by Patrick Baert and Bryan S. Turner (2007) and Reconstructing Democracy, Recontextualizing Dewey: Pragmatism and Interactive Constructivism in the Twenty-first Century, edited by Jim Garrison (2008).

Type
Review Essay
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , June 2011 , pp. 439 - 454
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baert, Patrick and Turner, Bryan S.. 2007. Pragmatism and European Social Theory. London: Barwell Press.Google Scholar
Bauman, Zygmunt. 1989. Modernity and the Holocaust. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Baver, Harry and Brighi, Elisabetta. 2009. Pragmatism in International Relations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Boltanski, Luc. 2009. De la Critique. Précis de Sociologie de l'Emancipation. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Boltanski, Luc and Chiapello, Eve. 2005 [1991]. The New Spirit of Capitalism. London: Verso.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boltanski, Luc and Thévenot, Laurent. 2006 [1991]. On Justification: Economies of Worth. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breviglieri, Marc. 2009. “L'insupportable. L'excès de proximité, l'atteinte à l'autonomie et le sentiment de violation du privé.” In Compétences critiques et sens de la justice, ed. Breviglieri, Marc, Lafaye, Claudette and Trom, Danny. Paris: Economica.Google Scholar
Cantelli, Fabrizio. 2008. “How to Analyse the ‘Citizen Turn’ in Public Policy: Patients' Voices Between Criticisms and Empowerment.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association (APSA), Boston.Google Scholar
Cantelli, Fabrizio, Roca, Marta, Stavo-Debauge, Joan and Pattaroni, Luca. 2009. Sensibilités Pragmatiques. Enquêter sur l'Action Publique. Brussels/Bern: P.I.E. Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1916. Democracy and Education. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1927a. The Public and its Problems. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1927b. “The Pragmatic Acquiescence.” In John Dewey: The Later Works, ed. Boydston, Joanne. vol. 3. Carbondale IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1935. “Liberalism and Social Action.” In John Dewey: The Later Works, ed. Boydston, Joanne. Carbondale IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Farr, John. 1999. “John Dewey and American Political Science.” American Journal of Political Science 43: 520–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Frank. 2009. Democracy and Expertise. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2007. “Democratic Theory and Political Science: A Pragmatic Method of Constructive Engagement.” American Political Science Review 101.3: 443–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrison, Jim. 2008. Reconstructing Democracy, Recontextualizing Dewey. Pragmatism and Interactive Constructivism in the Twenty-first Century. Albany NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Joas, Hans. 1984. “Durkheim et le pragmatisme.” Revue Française de Sociologie 25.4: 560–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, James. 1999. “Dewey's Pragmatism, Social Inquiry and Democracy: Introduction to the Symposium.” American Journal of Political Science 43.2: 518–19.Google Scholar
Knight, Jack and Johnson, James. 2007. “The Priority of Democracy: A Pragmatist Approach to Political-Economic Institutions and the Burden of Justification.” American Political Science Review 101.1: 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lippmann, Walter. 1925. The Phantom Public. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lovejoy, Arthur. 1908. “The Thirteen Pragmatisms.” The Journal of Philosophy 5 (Jan. 2): 5–12; (Jan 16): 29–39.Google Scholar
McGilvray, Eric. 2004. Reconstructing Public Reason. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Menand, Louis. 2001. The Metaphysical Club: The Story of Ideas in America. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.Google Scholar
Morales, Alfonso. 2003. Renascent Pragmatism: Studies in Law and Social Science. Burlington, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A. 2003. Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rorty, Richard. 1998. Achieving Our Country. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, Anne and Ingram, Helen. 2003. “The Pragmatic Policy Analyst.” In Renascent Pragmatism: Studies in Law and Social Science, ed. Morales, Alfonso. Burlington UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Seigfried, Charlene Haddock. 2008. “Thinking Desire: Taking Perspectives Seriously.” In Reconstructing Democracy, Recontextualizing Dewey. Pragmatism and Interactive Constructivism in the Twenty-first Century, ed. Garrison, Jim. Albany NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Singer, Beth. 1999. Pragmatism, Rights and Democracy. New York: Fordham University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, Shannon. 2001. Living Across and Through Skins. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Talisse, Robert B. 2007. A Pragmatist Philosophy of Democracy: Communities of Inquiry. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thévenot, Laurent. 2006. L'Action au Pluriel. Paris: La Découverte.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westbrook, Robert. 1990. “Lewis Mumford, John Dewey, and the ‘Pragmatic Acquiescence’.” In Lewis Mumford: Public Intellectual, ed. , Agatha and Hugues, Thomas. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yanow, Dvora. 2007. “Qualitative-Interpretive Methods in Policy Research.” In Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics and Methods, ed. Fischer, Frank, Miller, Gerald and Sidney, Mara. New York: CRC Press.Google Scholar