De-Centering, Not Discarding, the 'Isms': Some Friendly Amendments

The authors are sympathetic to much of David Lake's argument in his critique of paradigmatic ‘isms’ in the field. However, they also seek to qualify his diagnosis of the problem and critically assess some of his prescriptions and his efforts to manage epistemological divides in the field. In the process, the authors also clarify certain aspects of ‘analytic eclecticism’.