M y critics claim that on one interpretation my views aref completely misguided, yet on another, little more than common sense. I think the latter inter-pretation is correct. I concede thaU made a mistake in using the dreaded p-word, which to mymree critics is like waving a re3 flag at a bull. Had I not used the p-word, they might KavelouncnFea^ier to attend to my argument rather than to lob broadsides at positivism, a philosophical view that has long been interred, and one I have no interest in resurrecting. Let me immediately say that I used the term left-uring simply to identify a stance, not to disparage it. The fact is that a number of scholars criticize "positivist research " for what they claim is its implicit political stance. I'm not sure how to label these critics; I'd welcome suggestions.1 My apologies to anyone who found the term offensive. To all three critics, let me also say that my article is not a brief for ineJh^doJo^cjl_m^nism. I concur with them
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Francis Schrag (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: