Paralogy as a move differs from innovation as system improvement

Evidence

The problem is therefore to determine whether it is possible to have a form of legitimation based solely on paralogy. Paralogy must be distinguished from innovation: the latter is under the command of the system, or at least used by it to improve its efficiency; the former is a move (the importance of which is often not recognized until later) played in the pragmatics of knowledge. The fact that it is in reality frequently, but not necessarily, the case that one is transformed into the other presents no difficulties for the hypothesis. — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 429

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sharpens the crucial distinction between innovation (system-serving) and paralogy (disruptive move) — a key concept for the Jameson comparison.
• XREF: connects to: Science’s paralogy is the antimodel to the totalizing performativity system — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 444; Borrowing an old word for a new practice masks conceptual rupture as restoration — Timothy Mitchell, Colonising Egypt, 339; Deliberate design generates new cultural variation faster and more constructively than random mutation — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 499 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Borrowing an old word for a new practice masks conceptual rupture as restoration #expands (0.85) — Timothy Mitchell, Colonising Egypt, 339
• Deliberate design generates new cultural variation faster and more constructively than random mutation #corroborates (0.75) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 499
• Knowledge grows by selective rearrangement within a research consensus, not accumulation #corroborates (0.75) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 448