Debating Disciplinarity

Datos Bibliográficos

ID2221153
AutoresRobert C Post (0000-0002-2581-919X, autor de correspondencia), Robert Post, Post (autor de correspondencia), Post Post (autor de correspondencia)
Año2009
Volumen35
Número4
Páginas749-770
Fecha de publicación2009-01-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaCritical Inquiry (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0093-1896 • E-ISSN: 1539-7858
EditorialUniversity of Chicago Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1086/599580
OpenAlexW4213349699
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas19
Referencias citadas16

I am a lawyer, and lawyers have their priors. One is that no question is innocent. Every question springs from an agenda that determines the range of acceptable answers. So if I amasked, as I have been for these remarks, “what is a discipline?” I want to know who is asking and for what purpose.\nSometimes questions of disciplinarity seek criteria for validating the “eccentric” angle of vision of a particular “intellectual” community in terms of its “methodology,” or “subject-matter,” or “curriculum,” or shared “purpose.” Sometimes questions of disciplinarity express apprehension about the “subordinate status” of a colonized discipline, or about the meaning of interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, or “dedisciplinarity.” And sometimes questions of disciplinarity are meant to initiate the quest for an “indiscipline” that will adequately express an “antiprofessionalism” hostile to “the institutional structures by means of which the various academic disciplines establish and extend their territorial claims.”

Art · Discipline · Library science · Literature · Rhetorical question · Social science · Sociology · Classics · Globalization and political ideologies · History · Religion and Society Interactions · Religion, Theology, and Education · Weber, Simmel, Sociological Theory