‘Epistemological break’ and ‘philosophical revolution’ - a critique of Althusser’s distinction between Scientific and Philosophic knowledge

Abstract

This article is an attempt to offer a critique on Louis Althusser’s distinction between Scientific and Philosophic knowledge. In executing this critique the work seeks to uncover the immanent
inconsistencies and contradictions that may be said to embody Althusser’s claim that the link between previous modes of knowledge and the rise of science involves what he calls an
“epistemological break”; while that of philosophy involves what he describes as “philosophical revolution”. Implied in this taxonomisation of Althusser is the claim that objective and factual factors alone characterize science whereas philosophy is the theoretical field for class struggle and subjective factors. However, this article takes the position that if science rises from and is in one way or another connected with other modes of knowledge,then the relationship between it and these other modes may not be that neatly delineated as is attempted by Althusser. The article subscribes to the contention that “objective validity preserves the moment of its emergence and
this moment permanently affects it”.