Abstract This paper explores how Nietzschean ‘deconstructive genealogies’ challenge core elements of philosophical methodology and social thought. Deconstructive genealogies reveal fragmentation and internal conflict within domains often presumed to be unified, such as our moral judgements. They thereby challenge projects of 'systematizing conservativism' that aim to impose coherence and systematicity on these domains through methods like conceptual analysis, functional explication, and reflective equilibrium. Moreover, inappropriate imposition of systematicity can likewise be a problem in social theory. The upshot is that such genealogies are often employed for ‘counter-reconciliatory’ projects in philosophy and ‘anti-noetic’ approaches in social theory.
Alexander Prescott‐Couch (Wed,) studied this question.