Response to Phil Hodkinson

British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 72, part 3, September 2002, pp. 452-453

2 Pages Posted: 10 Jan 2016

See all articles by Bent Flyvbjerg

Bent Flyvbjerg

University of Oxford - Said Business School

Date Written: September 1, 2002

Abstract

In phronetic research the understanding of validity claims is hermeneutic, not objectivistic. Thus I relate validity claims to interpretation and I oppose the view that any one among a number of interpretations lacks value because it is “merely” an interpretation. The key point here is the establishment of a better alternative, where “better” is defined according to sets of non-foundational validity claims. If a better interpretation demonstrates the previous interpretation to be “merely” interpretation, this new interpretation remains valid until another, still better interpretation is produced which can reduce the previous interpretation to “merely” interpretation. And so on.

Suggested Citation

Flyvbjerg, Bent, Response to Phil Hodkinson (September 1, 2002). British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 72, part 3, September 2002, pp. 452-453. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2712894

Bent Flyvbjerg (Contact Author)

University of Oxford - Said Business School ( email )

Park End Street
Oxford, OX1 1HP
Great Britain

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
17
Abstract Views
157
PlumX Metrics
!

Under construction: SSRN citations while be offline until July when we will launch a brand new and improved citations service, check here for more details.

For more information