What is the subject? Does the subject even exist beyond a certain Aristotelean epistemological taxonomy which has proven particularly long-lived in terms of production of discourse as indeed most forms of prejudice? Who needs the subject and for whom is it socially produced and reproduced?
These are essential questions to ponder as science (both intelligence science and academic science) need move beyond thinking within the box and so the box being irrational subcultural fixations such as paradigm, genre, narrative and indeed subject itself but also irrational discursive premises such as carno-phallogocentrism, phonocentrism and physionomism.
How then move beyond those irrational fixations that prevent and indeed very much unreasonably slow down scientific progress? Interdisciplinary science is one established answer which of course has its place yet this still maintains the matrix of patriarchal epistemological taxonomy in terms of merely producing meetings between pre-existing and essentially unaltered epistemological frames.
What is rather needed is a general science of epistemology that will seek to undermine structural prejudice in every field by means of investigatory science journalism. This is sort of a synthesis of Derrida and Foucault whereby deconstruction resolutely moves on to perform conceptual, social and technological innovation. This is based on the fundamental insight that problems are opportunities for innovation and so we need an applied science of epistemology that leaves the Ivory of Tower of ancient Greek ethnocentrism in using physionomism (antibody ideology) specifically and DOLP (discrimination, oppression, lies and prejudice) generally for purposes of conceptual, social and technological innovation.
We need thus move beyond mere description of problem, structure, oppression etc. in deploying physionomism and DOLP as opportunities for social change.
Epistemology needs thus not merely become an interdisciplinary study but indeed become the science of science in seeking to subversively and transformatively so undermine existing so called “disciplines”. This is not to suggest that scientific fields ought become abolished but rather that there delimitations ought become blurred and fluid and that their epistemological frames become desacralized. These rigidly fixed epistemological frames are fundamentally unhelpful and so frames of sciences need become flexible, fluid and dynamic rather than static and stale. Epistemology as an applied political science may thus become particularly helpful in undoing oppressive cultural hegemonies of every kind.
Epistemology needs hence become reimagined and vastly enlarged in scope so as to apply to every field of science by means of conceptual, social and technological transformation in conceptual, social and technological innovation indeed.
The Eurolect – Politics of the Para-Christian documentation project