Tansu KUCUKONCU , PhD
( Tansu KÜÇÜKÖNCÜ ( in Turkish alphabet ) )
------------------------------
( L'archéologie du savoir , 1969)
As I can be able to understand Foucault:
The base of philsophy, sciences and every kind of knowledge is
discursions. In fact, the base is language, but it alone is not enough to
form a strong base. The most important thing is usage of it; that's
discursions which are composed of staments which are composed of sentences
which are tried to be given meanings by composite usage of words, mimics,
gestures, pronounciation etc. (that's by the reflections of Wittgenstein's
form of life in language).
Meanings of discursions are situation-dependent. Situations are
dependent on subjects (owner of discursion), time (present and past),
place (enviroment) etc. Two discursions which are composed of the same
words and same gramatical structure may not have the same meaning. But
at the same time, two different discursions may have the same meaning.
There is no knowledge without a discursive practice; and any discursive
practice may be defined by the knowledge that it forms.
Science is localized in a field of knowledge and plays a role in it. A
role that varies according to diferent discursive formations, and is
modified with their mutations.
He prefers archeology in historical analysis of discursions.
In history of science, he says archeological analysis can show
positively how a science functions in the element of knowledge.
He prefers archeology since it is more systematic. Instead he says
he does not defend structialism, the analysis method he chooses is a
structual one. Instead using isoleted units of analysis, archeology, rather
tries to find the relations also between its analytic units (units of its
structures).
