Postmodernism and the Present State of Integrative Studies: A Reply to Benson and His Critics

Simple item page
dc.contributorNicholson, Carol
dc.contributor.editorKlein, Julie Thompson
dc.contributor.editorBailis, Stanley
dc.contributor.editorMiller, Raymond C.
dc.date.accessioned2016-02-05T18:43:45Z
dc.date.available2016-02-05T18:43:45Z
dc.date.issued1987
dc.description.abstractBenson and his critics seem to make three troubling assumptions: 1) There is only one valid theoretical approach to interdisciplinary studies. 2) Unanimous agreement is a possible and desirable goal. 3) When a consensus on general principles and methods is achieved, a new legitimacy will follow. These assumptions are all wrong because they are based in the modern Cartesian school of foundationalist epistemology rather than postmodern epistemology. Knowledge and justification are better understood as social phenomena rather than as grounded in nature, reason, language or historical laws. Interdisciplinarians should be open to a variety of approaches, picking what works the best for the time being.
dc.identifier.citationNicholson, Carol. "Postmodernism and the Present State of Integrative Studies: A Reply to Benson and His Critics." Issues in Integrative Studies 5 (1987): 19-34.
dc.identifier.issn1081-4760
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10323/4023
dc.publisherAssociation for Interdisciplinary Studies
dc.relation.ispartofIssues in Interdisciplinary Studies
dc.titlePostmodernism and the Present State of Integrative Studies: A Reply to Benson and His Critics

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
02_Vol_5_pp_19_34_Postmodernism_and_the_Present_State_of_Integrative_Studies_A_Reply_to_Benson_and_His_Critics_(Carol_Nicholson).pdf
Size:
417.64 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download

Collections

Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies Volume 05 (1987)