2017Unpublished venueRequires access

Neo-Pragmatist Planning Theory

Charles Hoch

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the re-emergence of pragmatist ideas among planning theorists from the 1980s through 2015. It covers five contributions that neo-pragmatist ideas brought to planning theory debates among scholars primarily in North America: power, fact–value dichotomy, problem solving, incrementalism and structure agency. The chapter explores some of the cross-fertilization of pragmatist ideas with European postmodern and post-structural social theory. The concept of a progressive movement that historians later coined to describe the many reform efforts owes some of its intellectual legitimacy to the early pragmatist ideas linking social action and knowledge with democratic participation. Instead of casting theory as a conceptual foundation for planning practice, pragmatists imagine theory as a different kind of deliberative social practice. Problem setting and solving for the pragmatist contribute to the quality of rational judgments used to anticipate and prepare for the future in specific ways.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This chapter provides an overview of the re-emergence of pragmatist ideas among planning theorists from the 1980s through 2015. It covers five contributions that neo-pragmatist ideas brought to planning theory debates among scholars primarily in North America: power, fact–value dichotomy, problem solving, incrementalism and structure agency. The chapter explores some of the cross-fertilization of pragmatist ideas with European postmodern and post-structural social theory. The concept of a progressive movement that historians later coined to describe the many reform efforts owes some of its intellectual legitimacy to the early pragmatist ideas linking social action and knowledge with democratic participation. Instead of casting theory as a conceptual foundation for planning practice, pragmatists imagine theory as a different kind of deliberative social practice. Problem setting and solving for the pragmatist contribute to the quality of rational judgments used to anticipate and prepare for the future in specific ways.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the re-emergence of pragmatist ideas among planning theorists from the 1980s through 2015. It covers five contributions that neo-pragmatist ideas brought to planning theory debates among scholars primarily in North America: power, fact–value dichotomy, problem solving, incrementalism and structure agency. The chapter explores some of the cross-fertilization of pragmatist ideas with European postmodern and post-structural social theory. The concept of a progressive movement that historians later coined to describe the many reform efforts owes some of its intellectual legitimacy to the early pragmatist ideas linking social action and knowledge with democratic participation. Instead of casting theory as a conceptual foundation for planning practice, pragmatists imagine theory as a different kind of deliberative social practice. Problem setting and solving for the pragmatist contribute to the quality of rational judgments used to anticipate and prepare for the future in specific ways.

Key concepts: Pragmatism, Epistemology, Social theory, Sociology, Agency (philosophy), Legitimacy, Incrementalism, Dialectic

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Neo-Pragmatist Planning Theory — Research Paper | ScholarLens