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

discipline (especially in regards to Foucault’s triangle as discussed later) and I am
interested to see what role it has played in this particular episteme.
1.2.3.05 I also attempt to address the manner in which, through the episteme, the
discipline may be perceived to have been constructed. I foc us on the prope nsity of the
discipline towards connaissance knowledge with the exclusion of savoir knowledge.
However, there is also the question of whether the connaissance knowledge itself is an
accurate representation of the discourse on, or the practice of entrepreneurship, or whether
this connaissance knowledge is influenced by academic prejudice. This question is
discussed further in the next section on Positionality, in particular sections 1.3.6 and 1.3.7.
This discussion is included in those sections because it relates to the sense of detachment I,
as a practitioner au fait with savoir knowledge, feel when I read some of the academic
articles on entrepreneurship.
1.2.3.07 Baudrillard [1994] has raised the question of academic work creating either
simulations or simulcrae of reality. A simulation is an accurate representation whereas a
simulcrae is a less than accurate representation but which is not recognised as such and
becomes a ‘being’ in its own right with and increasing separation from reality. W hether the
discipline of entrepreneurship, as perceived through the episteme, is a simulation or a
simulcrae is discussed as part of the outcome of the epistemic analysis.
1.2.3.08 Whether the status as being a simulation or a simulcrae is an accurate measure of
Foucault’s concept of the dubious discipline is also addressed along with other issues that
could affect disciplinic dubiety. These include the acceptance of savoir knowledge into the
discipline, something that is of particular interest to me given my own positionality.
17