Interpretive analytics is the term used by Hubert Drefus and Paul Rabinow describing the methodological approach of Foucault in his analysis of the history of sexuality.[1] Foucault himself never used this term.[1] More generally, IA is now used to analyze and develop "the form and formation of a body of knowledge and its associated social practices by a way of a series of historical case studies". [1] When used to analyze said historical case studies, IA employs two main methodologies used by Foucault separately in his earlier works (archaeology and genealogy).[1] Archeology is a means of investigating the " 'conditions of possibility' which give rise to knowledge" [2]; genealogy refers to "the 'constraints' that limit the orders of knowledge" [3].
Wilson lists the following five questions as key elements in an IA study: [4]
- 1 Problematization (identification of the problem that caused the discourse to emerge as a response)
- 2 Archeology (description of the form of a discursive regime in a particular period)
- 3 Genealogy (description of how the discursive regime is formed and its effects)
- 4 Discontinuous theories (examination of the same topic in different epistemes)
- 5 Dispositif (identification of change and continuity in the understanding of the topic in different epistemes).
See also
editReferences
edit- ^ a b c d Wilson, Suze (2016-05-27). Thinking Differently about Leadership: A Critical History of Leadership Studies. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 222. ISBN 9781784716790.
- ^ O'Farrell, Clare (2005). Michel Foucault. London/Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. p. 69. ISBN 9780761961635.
- ^ O'Farrell, Clare (2005). Michel Foucault. London/Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. p. 69. ISBN 9780761961635.
- ^ Wilson, Suze (2016-05-27). Thinking Differently about Leadership: A Critical History of Leadership Studies. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 227. ISBN 9781784716790.