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

of this dissertation would have been near impossible unless some form of Borgian analysis
[Baudrillard, 1994, p1] was possible, where an entity (as in this case a discourse - as I have
defined it in this dissertation) could be analysed in its entirety. Therefore a more suitable
term to describe the type of analysis, as discussed in section 1.2.3, rather than ‘discourse
analysis’ per se, would be epistemic analysis. This epistemic analysis would be more
focused as an analysis of a collective ‘bod y of work’ as part of a discipline.
3.1.2.04 The use of ‘Foucauldian’ also was an issue. I have replaced discourse analysis
with epistemic analysis and I have used Foucault’s ideas on episteme as a philosophic base
for the epistemic analys is. However Foucault never used the episteme as a basis of
analysis, for him it was a philosophical concept. I have decided to develop such epistemic
analysis using archaeology as the research method. The archaeology I use results in the
creation of what I have described as the aliran. The term archaeology is generally accepted
as ‘being’ Foucauldian, according to Lawlor, “obviously, the word ‘archeology’ belongs to
Foucault” [Lawlor, 2003, p24].
3.1.2.05 Yet as pointed out by Lawlor “at the end of his life, Merleau Ponty, and this
virtually at the same time as Foucault was characterizing his own thinking as an
archaeology” [Lawlor, 2003, p24], albeit with a different focus to Foucault. This still does
not mean however that the term archaeology ‘belongs’ to either Foucault or to Merleau
Ponty. According to Lawlor [2003] the word has a ‘pre-history’ with Foucault attributing
his source of the word to Kant, with Merleau Ponty find ing the source of his version of
archaeology in Husserl’s ‘phenomenological archaeology’.
3.1.2.06 While it may be more academically acceptable to use the expression Husserlian
phenomenological archaeology rather than Foucauldian archaeology, I am pointing out that
to ascribe archaeology to either Foucault or to Husserl may be limited and also may miss
the objective of good form in that it ignores the efforts of others in the same field. The term
lineage tends to better express the flow of ideas from one academic to the next, i.e. the
notion of knowledge being a continuum. Support for the notion of lineage is inherent in the
concept of annotation where one attributes ideas of others that have contributed to their
115