Talk:Episteme
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Comments
At one point the article mentions a prori. Why use a term that has no clear meaning in an encylopeadic article. Further to this the article is confusing and the lead in pointless —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.210.160.42 (talk) 07:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
This is not how Foucault defined episteme. For Foucault an episteme was the regime of truth that underlay all the discourses of a particular epoch.
This idea seems very similar to the concept of the meme, maybe some parallels can be made
I find it astounding that a concept so fundamental to the history of philosophy can have an entry that is exclusively devoted to the philosophy of a single individual philosopher, and a modern one at that! This page needs serious help.
I could not agree more. This page is useless as the lead-in is one line, and the rest of the (stub) article is based on one (modern!!) philosopher! --88.212.81.57 09:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
It is not exactly correct that Kuhn was influenced by Bachelard and his concept of epistemological obstacles. Rather, he was mainly influenced by two other figures in the tradition of historical epistemology (which Bachelard was a part of) - Metzger and Koyré. Cf. Gutting, G. (2003). ”Thomas Kuhn and French philosophy of science”. Thomas Kuhn. T. Nickles. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.38.148.117 (talk) 09:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

