Splitting the universe : on the relevance of dichotomies for the study of public administration
By: RUTGERS, Mark R
.
Material type: 
ArticlePublisher: Thousand Oaks : SAGE, March 2001Administration & Society 33, 1, p. 3-20Abstract: Traditionally, the politcs/administration dechotomy is referred to in the study of public administration as the founding dichotomy. Debates on its tenability are as old as its dicovery . I the arguments put forward, however, no attiontion is paid to the epistemological nature of dichotomies. This article tries to fill this gap. It is usually assumed that dichotomies have a cotnraditoctory nature .By looking of the at the logic of contradictions, and arguments relating to use of logicl practice, it is concluded that this is a falce assumption. They are to be interpreted as conceptual constructs with an idelal-typical status. This reintermpretation of the nature of dichotimies helps to clarify the debates on the politics/admninstration dichotomy. It implies, for instatnce, that refeicting the dichotomy because of tis condradctory or unrealistic nature is misguided
| Item type | Current location | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Periódico | Biblioteca Graciliano Ramos | Periódico | Not for loan |
Traditionally, the politcs/administration dechotomy is referred to in the study of public administration as the founding dichotomy. Debates on its tenability are as old as its dicovery . I the arguments put forward, however, no attiontion is paid to the epistemological nature of dichotomies. This article tries to fill this gap. It is usually assumed that dichotomies have a cotnraditoctory nature .By looking of the at the logic of contradictions, and arguments relating to use of logicl practice, it is concluded that this is a falce assumption. They are to be interpreted as conceptual constructs with an idelal-typical status. This reintermpretation of the nature of dichotimies helps to clarify the debates on the politics/admninstration dichotomy. It implies, for instatnce, that refeicting the dichotomy because of tis condradctory or unrealistic nature is misguided
Click on an image to view it in the image viewer
There are no comments for this item.