This paper offers a critique of Evers' and Lakomski's 1991 book, "Knowing Educational Administration," and their discussion of neo-Marxist and critical theory. This paper argues that the science of educational administration is a historically contingent product of particular social forces and interests at a particular time. The kind of educational administration that was dominant during the 1960s and 70s separated educational from administrative concerns and privileged the latter. This paper describes how the Evers and Lakomski misinterpret Habermas and dismiss critical theory as subjectivist and examines problems with their choice of two major cultural theorists--Geertz and Sergiovanni. In conclusion, it offers an analysis of neo-Marxist organizational theory that has not been fundamental to the emergence of critical theories of educational administration. Second, their analysis of Habermas's early work is wrongly claimed as the basis of Bates's early work, as well as that of Giroux and Apple. Third, they fail to deal with Marxist/critical theories' political, social, and historical aspects. Philosophers who undertake analysis of educational administration should demonstrate care in the treatment of the arguments under examination, show proper reticence in representing social arguments, and avoid taking single instances as representative of the field under examination. (LMI)