Despite the difficulties noted by some in the Althusserian notion of
"problematic" (see, for example, the criticisms made by Barry Hindess and
Paul Hirst in chapter 1 of _Mode of Production and Social Formation_) there
is a useful account of the concept of "paradigm" (as it appears in Kuhn,
Popper, etc) which contrasts it with the concept of "problematic" (which
appears explicitly in Althusser, but also, the author claims, in the works
of Bachelard, Canguilhem, and Foucault) in the "introduction for English
readers" to Dominique Lecourt's _Marxism and Epistemology: Bachelard,
Canguilhem, Foucault_ (New Left Books, London, 1975). Hindess and Hirst
also has quite a lot to say about the concepts of "theoretical discourse"
and "epistemological discourse" in that chapter, which may be of some
interest, as might be Mark Cousins and Athar Hussain, _Michel Foucault_,
which could be taken as a depolyment of the concepts of Hindess and Hirst to
a reading of Foucault's work up to 1980 or so. There is also a chapter on
Foucault (focusing on _The Archaeology of Knowledge_, written in 1969) which
may be of interest to some members of this list.
The crucial point regarding the concept of "paradigm" that Lecourt's
introduction raises is the necessity of a "convention" between subjects of
knowledge (and thus the necessity of what Althusser called "the empiricist
conception of knowledge" -- see the introduction to _Reading 'Capital'_) to
that concept, which he claims, rightly in my view, is not necessary to the
understandings of how theoretical discourses are structured in the works of
Foucault et al.
I hope these works and my brief synopsis are of some help.
David.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred MacDonald" <fmacdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 5:52 AM
Subject: Questions about Discourse
> Hello Foucauldian list members. My name is Fred MacDonald; I am a
> doctorial student at the Ontario Institute for Studies in
> Education/University of Toronto. My research is focussing on the
> discourses and discursive practices that shape and define teachers and
> their work.
>
> Lately, I have been grappling with the distinctions between and among
> discourse, ideoology, world-view, philosophical orientation and paradigm.
> Can anyone from the list offer any clarification? I am especially
> interested in the difference(s) between discourse and paradigm. Would
> Foucault be insulted by my query?
>
> Thanks for any comment you might be able to give.
>
> Fred
>
>
> Fred MacDonald
> Department of Theory and Policy Studies
> Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto
> Toronto, Ontario
>
> fmacdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
"problematic" (see, for example, the criticisms made by Barry Hindess and
Paul Hirst in chapter 1 of _Mode of Production and Social Formation_) there
is a useful account of the concept of "paradigm" (as it appears in Kuhn,
Popper, etc) which contrasts it with the concept of "problematic" (which
appears explicitly in Althusser, but also, the author claims, in the works
of Bachelard, Canguilhem, and Foucault) in the "introduction for English
readers" to Dominique Lecourt's _Marxism and Epistemology: Bachelard,
Canguilhem, Foucault_ (New Left Books, London, 1975). Hindess and Hirst
also has quite a lot to say about the concepts of "theoretical discourse"
and "epistemological discourse" in that chapter, which may be of some
interest, as might be Mark Cousins and Athar Hussain, _Michel Foucault_,
which could be taken as a depolyment of the concepts of Hindess and Hirst to
a reading of Foucault's work up to 1980 or so. There is also a chapter on
Foucault (focusing on _The Archaeology of Knowledge_, written in 1969) which
may be of interest to some members of this list.
The crucial point regarding the concept of "paradigm" that Lecourt's
introduction raises is the necessity of a "convention" between subjects of
knowledge (and thus the necessity of what Althusser called "the empiricist
conception of knowledge" -- see the introduction to _Reading 'Capital'_) to
that concept, which he claims, rightly in my view, is not necessary to the
understandings of how theoretical discourses are structured in the works of
Foucault et al.
I hope these works and my brief synopsis are of some help.
David.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred MacDonald" <fmacdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 5:52 AM
Subject: Questions about Discourse
> Hello Foucauldian list members. My name is Fred MacDonald; I am a
> doctorial student at the Ontario Institute for Studies in
> Education/University of Toronto. My research is focussing on the
> discourses and discursive practices that shape and define teachers and
> their work.
>
> Lately, I have been grappling with the distinctions between and among
> discourse, ideoology, world-view, philosophical orientation and paradigm.
> Can anyone from the list offer any clarification? I am especially
> interested in the difference(s) between discourse and paradigm. Would
> Foucault be insulted by my query?
>
> Thanks for any comment you might be able to give.
>
> Fred
>
>
> Fred MacDonald
> Department of Theory and Policy Studies
> Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto
> Toronto, Ontario
>
> fmacdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>