Educational researchers continue to polarize into 'qualitative' and 'quantitative' camps, with these terms often functioning as global identity markers, rather than as styles of research that are available to anyone. Many scholars have lamented the drawbacks of researchers being siloed into opposing, apparently incommensurable research paradigms, and have advocated for more inclusive and mixed-methods approaches. However, mixed methods research is not necessarily a good fit for every researcher, research study or research question. In this theoretical paper, I argue that the distinctions commonly made between qualitative and quantitative research are fundamentally incoherent and that the challenges researchers face across both styles of research are essentially analogous. I present methodological pragmatism as an accessible and convenient, compatibilist framework for making research design choices which cut across qualitative-quantitative divides. I propose that the exploratory-(dis)confirmatory distinction is of considerably more practical relevance to educational researchers than qualitative-quantitative ones, and I outline how methodological pragmatism, while consistent with a degree of methodological specialism, recognizes the availability of all research methods for all researchers. Methodological pragmatism liberates researchers in education to conduct the most rigorous research possible by drawing on any methods from any tradition that will further their research goals.