In my response to Dr. Muth, I attempted to compare the two approaches to our lecture last week with Dr. Susan Clair. Phronesis would be best used to answer the question of “Who gains and who loses from the GED restructuring and by which mechanisms of power? Is it desirable to base federal funding for ABE based on population? Which direction do we, as a nation, want to go with ABE? Of course, I'm not even sure if this makes total sense, but I felt that those were all questions that we could use phronetic science to answer...how many forms of this word can I use?
Episteme seemed a little easier to define. It literally translates to science. It's analytic information gained from controlled experiments. The major difference here is that it does not involve judgement, values, or interest. This is where phronesis goes BEYOND episteme. Phronesis involves social interaction/discussion vs strict observation, which seems to be at the core of episteme.