Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract This article explores the idea of value pluralism, the problems it poses for public administration, and how an examination of legal reasoning, as a form of practical reasoning, might help public administrators deal with these problems. It is argued that legal reasoning can be helpful because it is rooted in a process of adversary argument and analogical reasoning that promotes the consideration of conflicting values or conceptions of the good.
Michael W. Spicer (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: