Discourse and Epistemology

Discourse: from classical understanding to the postmodern revolution

Discourse (from Late Latin discursus — reasoning, argument) is one of the most polysemous and influential terms in modern philosophy, linguistics, and the humanities generally. Its evolution from a classical understanding as logical reasoning to a postmodern conception of language as an instrument of power reflects fundamental shifts in how we understand the nature of knowledge, language, and social reality.

Classical origins of the concept of discourse

The roots of the concept of discourse reach back into ancient philosophy, where even Plato and Aristotle already distinguished between immediate (intuitive) and mediated (discursive) knowledge. Plato contrasted the universal, unified mind with the discursive mind-as-reason, which, in its movement, grasps and relates individual meanings to one another. This distinction laid the foundation for understanding discourse as a process of sequential, logically structured thought.

Thomas Aquinas developed this tradition further, treating discursive thought as the movement of the intellect from one object to another. In the 17th-18th centuries, with the development of early modern science, various interpretations arose of the relationship between intuitive and discursive knowledge.

The rationalists (Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz) held that intellectual intuition guaranteed the universality and necessity of scientific knowledge, providing a foundation for discursive thought. Hobbes tied discursivity to linguistic capacity, defining human understanding as a sequence of representations, which he called "speech in the mind."

John Locke held that fundamental truths are grasped intuitively, while more complex ones are grasped through sequential reasoning. The more steps in this sequence, the clearer the conclusion becomes. This understanding emphasized the procedural character of discursive thought.

German philosophy and the critical turn

In German Enlightenment philosophy, two opposing lines developed in the treatment of discursive thought. One (Christian Wolff, Moses Mendelssohn) overstated its role; the other (Friedrich Jacobi, Johann Hamann) opposed mediated knowledge with intuition, feeling, and faith.

Immanuel Kant, in the "Critique of Pure Reason," carried out a decisive turn, contrasting the discursive clarity of concepts with the intuitive clarity of intuitions. He defined discursive thought as cognition through the understanding by means of concepts, where a concept functions as a discursive representation of what is common to many objects.

Hegel went further, contrasting discursive thought (identified with the formal and rational) with speculative thought, which grasps the unity of the immediate and the mediated. This dialectical treatment prepared the ground for a more complex understanding of discourse in the 20th century.

The postmodern revolution in the understanding of discourse

The 20th century saw a radical rethinking of the concept of discourse in French postmodernist and poststructuralist philosophy. The new understanding is characterized by a particular intellectual disposition and ideological orientation, expressed in texts that possess coherence and integrity, and are embedded in socio-cultural contexts.

The linguistic turn

In the 1960s-70s, discourse began to be understood as a coherent sequence of sentences or speech acts, bringing it close to the concept of a text. By the late 1980s, however, a qualitative leap took place in this understanding.

Michel Foucault and the power of discourse

Michel Foucault carried out a genuine revolution in the understanding of discourse, showing its inseparable connection to power relations. In his conception, discourse is not merely a way of speaking, but a mechanism for producing knowledge, one that determines what can be said, by whom, and under what conditions.

Foucault demonstrated how discourses shape social reality, creating the very objects they speak of. Medical discourse, for example, doesn't just describe illness — it constructs the concept of norm and pathology, thereby defining the social practices of treatment, control, and discipline.

"Discourse is not simply that which translates struggles or systems of domination into language, but is the very thing for which and by which one struggles — discourse is the power which is to be seized."

The social-constructionist approach

The Foucauldian tradition developed into social-constructionist approaches to discourse analysis. As researchers Marianne W. Jorgensen and Louise J. Phillips note, discourse is understood as "the general idea that language is structured according to patterns that people's utterances follow when they take part in different domains of social life."

This led to the identification of specific types of discourse:

• Medical discourse — the system of knowledge and practices in healthcare
• Political discourse — ways of speaking about power and politics
• Scientific discourse — the rules for producing and validating scientific knowledge
• Legal discourse — the language of law and legal relations
• Educational discourse — the practices of transmitting knowledge and forming subjects

The modern understanding of discourse

Today, discourse is understood as "language within language" — a particular vocabulary, semantics, pragmatics, and syntax, manifesting as ideology within the communicative acts, speech, and texts in which they are realized. Key features of the modern understanding of discourse include:

Epistemology: the science of knowledge and cognition

Epistemology (from Ancient Greek ἐπιστήμη — scientific knowledge + λόγος — word, discourse) is the philosophical-methodological discipline studying knowledge as such — its structure, function, and development. It often serves as a synonym for gnoseology, especially in the English-language tradition.

Distinguishing epistemology from gnoseology

In non-classical philosophy, a tendency emerged to distinguish these concepts:

Classical epistemology and its features

Classical epistemology took shape during the scientific revolution of the 17th-18th centuries, and is characterized by several key features:

1. Criticism

Epistemology begins with a critique of everyday notions of knowledge, with examining the problem of the relationship between illusion and reality, and distinguishing opinion from knowledge. Plato had already concluded that knowledge must be not just true, but justified.

The 17th-century epistemological turn placed the problem of justifying knowledge at the center of philosophical inquiry. Francis Bacon and René Descartes criticized scholastic metaphysics; George Berkeley criticized materialism; Immanuel Kant criticized traditional ontology.

2. Foundationalism and normativism

Classical epistemology sought to find an unshakable foundation for all human knowledge. This led to a search for basic norms allowing knowledge to be distinguished from non-knowledge. In early modern science, experiment and mathematical modeling were considered such a foundation.

Two main directions emerged:

• Empiricism (Bacon, Locke, Hume) — the criterion of justified knowledge is correspondence to sense experience
• Rationalism (Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz) — knowledge must fit within a system of innate ideas or a priori categories of reason

3. Subject-centrism

The foundation of the entire system of knowledge is the fact of the knowing subject's existence. Descartes's "cogito ergo sum" (I think, therefore I am) became the paradigmatic expression of this principle. Knowledge of the external world becomes mediated, giving rise to the problem: how is knowing the external world even possible?

4. Science-centrism

Since classical epistemology took shape during the era when early modern science was forming, it regarded scientific knowledge as the highest form of cognition. Immanuel Kant considered the existence of scientific knowledge originally justified, and the neo-Kantians equated epistemology with the theory of science.

Non-classical epistemology: a radical renewal

At the end of the 20th century, a non-classical epistemology began to take shape, radically different from the classical one. Global cultural shifts demanded a new understanding of knowledge and cognition.

Main features of non-classical epistemology:

The main problems of epistemology

Epistemology as a discipline is structured around several key problems:

The central question of epistemology

The central question of epistemology: is the world knowable in principle? Answers to this question give rise to various philosophical positions:

The relationship between discourse and epistemology

Discourse and epistemology are closely interrelated in the modern understanding. This connection shows up in several respects:

1. The linguistic construction of knowledge

The postmodern understanding shows that knowledge is not simply expressed in language, but is constructed through discursive practices. Different discourses create different types of knowledge, setting the rules for what may count as true or false.

2. Power and knowledge

The Foucauldian tradition demonstrates the inseparable link between power and knowledge. Epistemological systems are not neutral — they serve particular interests, and reproduce particular power relations through discursive practices.

3. The social nature of cognition

Non-classical epistemology recognizes the social nature of cognition. Knowledge is produced within particular discursive communities, which establish the rules of validation and the criteria of truth.

4. The contextuality of knowledge

Modern approaches emphasize that knowledge is always contextual — it arises under particular discursive conditions, and cannot be fully separated from them.

Current trends and prospects

The current development of discourse and epistemological research is marked by several trends:

Conclusion

Discourse and epistemology are key concepts of contemporary humanistic thought, allowing us to understand the complex processes by which knowledge is produced, circulated, and legitimized in society. Studying them shows that knowledge is not a simple reflection of reality, but a complex social construct, formed within particular discursive practices.

The evolution of these concepts, from classical to postmodern interpretations, reflects broader shifts in the understanding of human cognition and social reality. Modern approaches emphasize language's active role in constructing knowledge, the social nature of cognition, and the inseparable link between knowledge and power.

For understanding the modern world, discourse analysis and epistemological reflection become necessary tools, allowing a critical examination of how knowledge is produced and disseminated across various spheres of social life — from science and education to politics and popular culture.