This thesis evaluates three theories representing the three perspectives identified by Goktug Morcol as perspectives of the hermeneutic critique in policy analysis, while explicating the revolutionary process that the science is currently undergoing. The evaluation is focused around the question as to whether the three theories are viable alternatives to positivist theories. First, a brief history of policy analysis is presented, highlighting the conditions that contributed to the rise of the general positivist paradigm as the ideal in policy analysis. This is followed by a summary and criticisms of the general positivist paradigm. Next, summaries of Dvora Yanow\u27s interpretive theory, Deborah Stone\u27s policy analysis as craft theory, and Frank Fischer\u27s discursive theory are presented as representatives of the three perspectives within the hermeneutic critique. Finally, an evaluation is offered of the three theories based on their ability to overcome the challenges presented by the criticisms of the general positivist paradigm
