Mapping the aliran of the academic discipline of entrepreneurship: A ...

articles that show a predominance of authorship by either current or past editors or board
members of the AMJ. Again, it is questionable whether these are indicative of real future
trends in entrepreneurship or simply, extensions of the particular AMJ episteme’s ‘wish
list’ as to that direction. However one could assume that not following such a ‘wish list’
and conforming to the episteme, could probably, unless the author s had high gravitas,
curtail the chances of publication in the AMJ. The interface between ‘playing politics’ in
order to get published and conducting solid research, the results of which justify being
published, is a fuzzy area. However, it is significant to the development of the discipline.
2.5.3.12 The AMJ episteme is only one of the episteme that can be include d within the
discipline of entrepreneurship. The collective episteme that can be found within the
discipline may depict a complex interplay of power as, like Leibniz’s bodies, the forces
they represent influence the substance, the very being, of the discipline. Currently, it may
be that, this interplay of power manifests itself, as per Dery and Toulouse [1996], in the
battle for the validity of definition of entrepreneurship. The flow of power around
Foucault’s triangle cannot help but be influenced by these episteme and the individual or
collective sets of delimitations they impose upon the discipline. The greater gravitas of the
episteme, or of the articles produced by that episteme, could conceivably influence that
flow of power. Just as planetary bodies can bend light so can epistemic bodies influence
the flow of thinking about entrepreneurship and accordingly its representationality. As one
of the more highly-ranked journals in academic circles, the delimitations as to the future
directions of research acceptable to the AMJ episteme, may, due to the particular gravitas
of the AMJ, (if indeed such gravitas is justified) be significant as to future directions of the
discipline. Whether the episteme’s delimitations are representational of the current
practice, or their predictions reflect accurate prescience of the evolution of the practice of
entrepreneurship, is something that only time will tell.
2.5.4 Analysing the grids of specification – ontology and prejudice
2.5.4.00 This section looks at the concepts of prejudice and the development of ontologies
with the discipline of entrepreneurship.
98