The Predicament of Experience
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12740600 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Harold Mah (Queen's University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2008 |
| Volume | 5 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 97-119 |
| Publication date | 2008-03-12 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Modern Intellectual History (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1479-2443 • E-ISSN: 1479-2451 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s1479244307001552 |
| OpenAlex | W2165326660 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 4 |
Every discipline has its foundational terms, those words that practitioners use to name what they study, or how they study, or why that study is valid. These terms often go unscrutinized when a discipline is up and running, but in the formative stages of a discipline and in periods of contention or crisis they often become subject to intensive criticism and attempts at redefinition. Challenging foundational terms is no simple task. Because they are foundational, they are difficult to do without, even by those who would reject them. They are often used or assumed by those who question them, and after intensive questioning is done they often simply recur, even in their most unquestioned, naive form. The “foundational” nature of foundational terms, one begins to see, is not just a matter of a basic organizing concept or a description of some natural process, but of a term that is invested with aspirations of different sorts. The term also offers authorization to interpret, enacts a wish, suggests a cultural utopia, or puts in place a political program. The density of functions found in foundational terms guarantees that even the most questioned term will return
Criticism · Epistemology · Formative assessment · Natural (archaeology · Pedagogy · Political science · Politics · Simple (philosophy · Sociology · Subject (documents · Term (time · Wish · Computer Science · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · History · Law · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science
| Citations per year | 0.21 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2012 - 2020 (9) |
| Highly cited | No |