Senior Lecturer in the School of Law Macquarie University Sydney, Australia
The development of disciplinary
structures of thinking
nineteenth century (. .)
“blindness and insight”.
the by But
blindness likewise, since this specificity was achieved at the expense of of vision. There was an increase of expertise but a loss of imagination (. apparent that in the many areas the marginal rate of return on increased long since been outweighed by the marginal cost of blindness (, .).
a broadness .). It is now insights has
Within particular disciplines, specialisation has become an institutional rather than an intellectual demand. Increasingly it is issues like professional legitimacy, funding models, and career advancement, which drive the pressure towards ever greater expertise over ever smaller areas (. .).
The intellect of human beings is not naturally confined: we draw connections, we are curious, we seek truths in many spheres. We use all our life to understand our life. The compartmentalisation of thinking (, .) fails to capture either how human beings relate to the world, or what excites them. To make a bold claim: it is not a lack of intellectual power, which inhibits us from solving problems; it is boredom and
disinterest (. .).
attempts to combine more than one disciplinary
without in any way attempting to redraw those boundaries. On the contrary, such an approach insists on the need to maintain the methodology of a discipline even while bringing one to bear on another. It asks scholars to apply what they know about one
discipline to the subject matter of another,
so that for discipline
history) applying sociological methods often a most valuable exercise, but note paradigm, it entrenches it. One juxtaposes
and asking sociological questions. This is that far from undermining the disciplinary A to B as two distinct bodies of knowledge
creates new objects of study by examining the themes or aspects
is to disciplines as factors are to
as metaphysics is to numbers. One therefore
without physics; extracts
new themes or issues to pursue and examines their rather than between disciplines. In this sense, Focault
operation or treatment across is the intellectual paradigm of
studies: in works such as The Archaeology
searches for the revealing commonalties between such widely disparate disciplines as economics, linguistics, and biology, finding in their approaches similar patterns of analysis and change (. .).