Defining the Human Sciences

Foucault's genealogical inquiry into the human sciences reveals the social, political, and historical contingencies behind such fundamental fields as biology, economy, and philology.  His study demonstrates not only the temporal brevity of these ostensibly timeless ideas, but also their capacity for change.  Is it the transcendental aspect of the human being that allows for such change?  Foucault describes a dramatic epistemological shift that occurred in early 19th century Europe, but I would like to understand more clearly how it was possible for this transformation to occur.

Foucault also introduces three pairs of ideas that, in his estimation, cover the knowledge of man in its entirety: function and norm, conflict and rule, signification and system.  These three pairs derive from biology, economy, and philology, respectively, but Foucault asserts that we should not consider them fully distinct from each other.  Rather, these models, which represent the essence of the human sciences beginning in the 19th century, are inextricably intertwined.