Comparison of Epistemological system's with Methodological Benchmarks in Spatial Planning

The subject of paper is the study of the epistemology of spatial planning (classical rationality, postmodern relativism and pluralism - critical rationality). The main purpose of this paper is to explain the pluralist-critical rationality in spatial planning. First, it is necessary to determine the position and rationality ratio of spatial planning in order to achieve this goal. Then, three epistemological approaches to spatial planning of classical rationality, postmodern relativism and pluralist-critical rationality have been critically analyzed and comparative comparisons. Research findings show that the concept of rationality in spatial planning is wider than its Cartesian meaning, and postmodern relativists attribute classical rationality to total rationality. Also, the epistemic contradictions in postmodern relativism distract spatial planning from its collective, practical and realistic nature. In contrast, the pluralist-critique approach has been able to resolve the weaknesses of classical rationality and respond to the critique of postmodern relativism toward rationality. This epistemic approach holds that modern rationality is based on a comprehensive and argument capacity that allows the acceptance and aggregation of the ideas, goals and values of spatial planning stakeholders at different levels of space. All this process takes place within the framework of an open and democratic environment that can convince stakeholders that they will reach an informed consent about the public interest.