The main purpose of my philosophical work is to understand how it is possible to understand. So, I have developed the « editology », an epistemological system. The main characteristic of the editology is to define the knowledge as a set of texts, discourses (and thus terms), and to assign the scientificity of those texts to the very conditions of their publishing, the manner they are accepted by the international scientific community. We can say that the editology has two purposes, understand the terms (terminology) and analyze the edition (editology sensu stricto). This philosophical approach leads to a conception of the knowledge (and truth) which admits that the hard core of rationalism (logic) is the « epistemological complex » STI (science-technology-industry). An important consequence of the editological thought is to establish an historical critic of the successive discourses which characterize the milestones of the human thinking, which are literature, religion, and philosophy. In that sense, the philosophy is defined as a discourse rejecting all the discourses.
Against the traditions
Indeed, we can say that the philosophy began with Thales of Milet, when he threw back all the traditions of Greece. I suggest, indeed, to define the philosophy as the tradition which throws back all the traditions. Any tradition is the opinion of the other one, and must be thus questioned by the philosopher. It is even this questioning which will distinguish the philosophy of the common thought.
The editology is an « historical epistemology », based on the practice of history of science, of religions and of other cultural productions.
The reason why I had developed the concept of STI is the necessity to distinguish the rational cultural productions from the emotional or imaginary ones, which lead to illusive ethical or political constructions. STI is a key-concept. It may be seen as an elaborate philosophical generalization of the economical notion of « science and industry ». In STI, the technology is the interface between science and industry, and thus between knowledge (truth) and practice (efficiency).
One of the most interesting consequences of replace science by STI In the epistemological research is to recognize that the criterium of scientificity of Karl Popper (falsifiability) lies concretely in technology.
If we wish to consider STI as a hegelian triad, it is necessary to invert S and T because, in the history of mankind, the techniques have preceded the science.