The question of knowledge remains a vexed issue in discussions about the curriculum. Even where curriculum becomes defined in terms of capabilities and capacities, there is still the question what it is that students should engage with in acquiring these. Discussions tend to veer between two positions, one focusing on intrinsic qualities of knowledge – Herbert Spencer’s ‘What knowledge is of most worth?’ – and one on extrinsic qualities – Michael Apple’s ‘Whose knowledge is of most worth?’ While the sociology of knowledge has made crucial contributions towards exposing the political complexities of curricular knowledge, it is limited in its ability to address more enduring questions about knowledge, such as those about truth and reality. This is why scholars such as Michael Young have argued for the need to bring knowledge back into the curriculum conversation. While I agree with the need for doing so, I question whether this can be done by moving back from sociology to epistemology, since both options provide different answers to the same questions that are based on the same set of premises. In my paper I turn to Deweyan pragmatism to articulate an approach to curricular knowledge that goes beyond the sociology-epistemology pendulum.