A response to Overeem and Verhoef’s criticism of value pluralism, arguing that my value pluralist approach is useful in understanding the role that politics should play in how we think about, teach, and practice public administration.
BerlinI.WilliamsB. (1994). Pluralism and liberalism: A reply. Political Studies, 41, 306-309.
2.
HampshireS. (2000). Justice is conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
OvereemP.VerhoefJ. (2014). Moral dilemmas, theoretical confusion: Value pluralism and its supposed implications for public administration. Administration & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0095399713519096
4.
PitkinH. F. (1993). Wittgenstein and justice: On the significance of Ludwig Wittgenstein for social and political thought. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5.
RortyR. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
SpicerM. W. (2010). In defense of politics in public administration: A value pluralist perspective. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
7.
WilliamsB. (2005). In the beginning was the deed: Realism and moralism in political argument. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
