The archaeology of knowledge
01 Sep 1989-pp 227-260
TL;DR: We may not be able to make you love reading, but archaeology of knowledge will lead you to love reading starting from now as mentioned in this paper, and book is the window to open the new world.
Abstract: We may not be able to make you love reading, but archaeology of knowledge will lead you to love reading starting from now. Book is the window to open the new world. The world that you want is in the better stage and level. World will always guide you to even the prestige stage of the life. You know, this is some of how reading will give you the kindness. In this case, more books you read more knowledge you know, but it can mean also the bore is full.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The authors found that men are engaging in a greater variety of discursive practices than have been discussed so far, but their findings do not point to a clear-cut typology with regards to hegemonic and alternative masculinitie.
Abstract: As childcare workers, men are in a contested position. On the one hand, they are in danger of being depicted as the pedophile; on the other hand, they are expected to bring something new and innovative to the thus-far female-dominated field. These men are experiencing ‘identity dissonance’ and have to find ways to manage and facilitate legitimate subject positions as both childcare workers and as men. Applying a perspective of discursive positioning, this article discusses men's positioning practices in nine qualitative interviews conducted with male childcare workers in German-speaking Switzerland. We identified a total of six discursive practices that men engage in to manage identity dissonance and construct a legitimate subject position. We found that men are engaging in a greater variety of practices than have been discussed so far. Unlike findings from other studies of men in female-dominated occupations, ours do not point to a clear-cut typology with regards to hegemonic and alternative masculinitie...
32 citations
Cites background from "The archaeology of knowledge"
...Discourses of masculinity ‘form the objects of which they speak’ (Foucault 1972) and are reproduced by continuously citing the very same discourses....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the epistemic procedures through which photography and its role in colonial governance operated between the late 1860s and 1875 were examined. But what was the work expected of these photographs, what were they meant "to do"? What was their relationship with anthropology and geography?
Abstract: This paper examines the mid-nineteenth century photographic collecting practices in the Colonial Office (CO) in London. Following methodologies laid down by Stoler and Joyce, the paper excavates the epistemic procedures through which photography and its role in colonial governance operated between the late 1860s and 1875. I focus my analysis on the production of, and response to, two CO despatches, which were circulated in November 1869 requesting photographs. But what was the work expected of these photographs, what were they meant “to do”? What was their relationship with anthropology and geography? The paper argues that in the praxis of central government, the role of photographic evidence was more uncertain and confused than instrumental interpretative models have assumed. I shall argue that in many cases photographs were not “evidence” in any dynamic sense in information provision, but rather functioned as tools of reassurance.
32 citations
Cites background from "The archaeology of knowledge"
...Echoing Foucault (1995), the photographs stand for culturally productive yet unarticulated and symbolic discursive processes....
[...]
...…and rhythm of the “race photographs” undermined the scientific and systematic objectives of its project, in the buildings project, the action of the enunciative or discursive regularities across the various albums in constructing the object of colonial governance is striking (Foucault 1995, 50–55)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors carried out a critical discourse analysis of interviews with 31 medical and legal revalidation policy makers, including the General Medical Council, Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, British Medical Association, National Health Service Employers, and the departments of health from across the United Kingdom.
Abstract: Purpose: To analyze prevailing definitions of revalidation (i.e., a recently instituted system of ongoing review for all physicians in the United Kingdom), the circumstances of their origin, and proposed applications, after a protracted and sometimes difficult decade in development. This was to support a more consensual approach to revalidation policy before its launch in 2012.
Method: In 2010 and 2011, the authors carried out a critical discourse analysis of interviews with 31 medical and legal revalidation policy makers. These individuals represented the main stakeholder bodies, including the General Medical Council, Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, British Medical Association, National Health Service Employers, and the departments of health from across the United Kingdom.
Results: The authors identified two overarching discourses: regulation and professionalism, held together by patients as “discursive glue.” Regulation frames revalidation as a way to identify “bad apples,” requiring a summative approach and minimum standards. Professionalism looks to revalidation as a process by which all doctors improve, requiring evolving standards and a developmental model.
Conclusions: These two discourses were not mutually exclusive; indeed, most interviewees used them interchangeably. However, they are in some regards at odds. Their coexistence has been supported by a shared discursive formation around patients. Yet the authors found little patient-centered policy in revalidation in its current form. The authors concluded that patients need to be recognized, making them present with an active voice. They also stressed the importance of established and ongoing evaluation of medical regulation as a policy and process.
32 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate the relationship between technocracy, direct democracy's storytelling and hyper-representation as a distinctive characteristic of neo-populisms, and highlight a strange meeting between technological storytelling about direct democracy and technocracy myths.
Abstract: In recent years, the scientific debate on populism has experienced a new momentum: on the one hand, the emergence of new populisms even in Western democracies and on the other hand, disagreement among scholars on the definition of populism. In this context, new trends have emerged—such as those concerning the link between populism and technology—along with the need to revise the traditional study paradigms, which are often difficult to operationalise. The transformation of the political sphere appears to be strongly interconnected with the digital media landscape. If the new forms of communication are the cause or the effect of processes, such as the personalisation of leadership, the verticalisation of political organisations, the presidentialisation of political parties, or the social de-legitimisation of the old “intermediate bodies”, these forms should be the subject of ongoing research. At the same time, a very simplistic storyline tries to overlap the rise of neo-populist parties with their use of communication technologies. A quality that is common to the many different populisms is an appeal to the use of direct democracy as a tool to empower citizens. Populism itself is sometimes portrayed as almost synonymous with direct democracy. At the same time, direct democracy is used by populists as a critique of the lack of participation in representative democracy and the need to make it more participatory. In this perspective, technology becomes a tool (and a storyline) to facilitate the use of direct democracy and the rise of a new form of “hyper-representation”. At the same time, concepts such as efficiency, privatisation, short-termism, newism, and meritocracy are keywords successfully used by populist leaders, technocracy elites and neo-liberal political leaders. In other words, we can highlight a strange meeting between technological storytelling about direct democracy and technocracy myths. Even among the new populist parties, the technopopulists appear to represent an important category, whose peculiarities can easily be put into evidence using some empirical tools (such as content analysis). The aim of this article is to investigate the relationships between technocracy, direct democracy’s storytelling and hyper-representation as a distinctive characteristic of neo-populisms.
32 citations
References
More filters
Book•
18 Jul 2003
TL;DR: Part 1: Social Analysis, Discourse Analysis, Text Analysis 1. Introduction 2. Texts, Social Events, and Social Practices 3. Intertextuality and Assumptions Part 2: Genres and Action 4. Genres 5. Meaning Relations between Sentences and Clauses 6. Discourses 8. Representations of Social Events Part 4: Styles and Identities 9. Modality and Evaluation 11. Conclusion
Abstract: Part 1: Social Analysis, Discourse Analysis, Text Analysis 1. Introduction 2. Texts, Social Events, and Social Practices 3. Intertextuality and Assumptions Part 2: Genres and Action 4. Genres 5. Meaning Relations between Sentences and Clauses 6. Types of Exchange, Speech Functions, and Grammatical Mood Part 3: Discourses and Representations 7. Discourses 8. Representations of Social Events Part 4: Styles and Identities 9. Styles 10. Modality and Evaluation 11. Conclusion
6,407 citations
TL;DR: A set of principles for the conduct and evaluation of interpretive field research in information systems is proposed, along with their philosophical rationale, and the usefulness of the principles is illustrated by evaluating three publishedinterpretive field studies drawn from the IS research literature.
Abstract: This article discusses the conduct and evaluatoin of interpretive research in information systems. While the conventions for evaluating information systems case studies conducted according to the natural science model of social science are now widely accepted, this is not the case for interpretive field studies. A set of principles for the conduct and evaluation of interpretive field research in information systems is proposed, along with their philosophical rationale. The usefulness of the principles is illustrated by evaluating three published interpretive field studies drawn from the IS research literature. The intention of the paper is to further reflect and debate on the important subject of grounding interpretive research methodology.
5,588 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: In Sorting Things Out, Bowker and Star as mentioned in this paper explore the role of categories and standards in shaping the modern world and examine how categories are made and kept invisible, and how people can change this invisibility when necessary.
Abstract: What do a seventeenth-century mortality table (whose causes of death include "fainted in a bath," "frighted," and "itch"); the identification of South Africans during apartheid as European, Asian, colored, or black; and the separation of machine- from hand-washables have in common? All are examples of classification -- the scaffolding of information infrastructures. In Sorting Things Out, Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star explore the role of categories and standards in shaping the modern world. In a clear and lively style, they investigate a variety of classification systems, including the International Classification of Diseases, the Nursing Interventions Classification, race classification under apartheid in South Africa, and the classification of viruses and of tuberculosis. The authors emphasize the role of invisibility in the process by which classification orders human interaction. They examine how categories are made and kept invisible, and how people can change this invisibility when necessary. They also explore systems of classification as part of the built information environment. Much as an urban historian would review highway permits and zoning decisions to tell a city's story, the authors review archives of classification design to understand how decisions have been made. Sorting Things Out has a moral agenda, for each standard and category valorizes some point of view and silences another. Standards and classifications produce advantage or suffering. Jobs are made and lost; some regions benefit at the expense of others. How these choices are made and how we think about that process are at the moral and political core of this work. The book is an important empirical source for understanding the building of information infrastructures.
4,480 citations
TL;DR: In this article, two such metaphors are identified: the acquisition metaphor and the participation metaphor, and their entailments are discussed and evaluated, and the question of theoretical unification of research on learning is addressed, wherein the purpose is to show how too great a devotion to one particular metaphor can lead to theoretical distortions and to undesirable practices.
Abstract: This article is a sequel to the conversation on learning initiated by the editors of Educational Researcher in volume 25, number 4. The author’s first aim is to elicit the metaphors for learning that guide our work as learners, teachers, and researchers. Two such metaphors are identified: the acquisition metaphor and the participation metaphor. Subsequently, their entailments are discussed and evaluated. Although some of the implications are deemed desirable and others are regarded as harmful, the article neither speaks against a particular metaphor nor tries to make a case for the other. Rather, these interpretations and applications of the metaphors undergo critical evaluation. In the end, the question of theoretical unification of the research on learning is addressed, wherein the purpose is to show how too great a devotion to one particular metaphor can lead to theoretical distortions and to undesirable practices.
3,660 citations
TL;DR: Problematization is proposed as a methodology for identifying and challenging assumptions underlying existing literature and, based on that, formulating research questions that are likely to lead to more influential theories.
Abstract: It is increasingly recognized that what makes a theory interesting and influential is that it challenges our assumptions in some significant way. However, established ways for arriving at research questions mean spotting or constructing gaps in existing theories rather than challenging their assumptions. We propose problematization as a methodology for identifying and challenging assumptions underlying existing literature and, based on that, formulating research questions that are likely to lead to more influential theories.
1,126 citations