This book brings together short contributions from knowledge workers in a wide variety of disciplines, both inside and outside the academy, to revisit a foundational question of the Enlightenment: what is the last or furthest end of knowledge ? As such, this book is about why we do what we do, and how we might know when we are done.

In the reorganization of knowledge that characterized the Enlightenment, disciplines were conceived as having particular ends, that is, purposes, as well as having end-points - points at which the projects would be complete. As we experience an ongoing shift to the knowledge economy of the Information Age, we ask: do we still conceptualize knowledge in this way? Does an individual discipline have both an inherent purpose and a natural endpoint ? What do an experiment on a fruit fly, a reading of a poem, and the writing of a line of code share in terms of purpose and potential?

In the nineteenth century, the universities of Europe institutionalized the modern academic disciplines. Many branches of knowledge have since gone their separate ways, but recent changes in technologies and institutions, and mounting political pressure, have refocused attention on the specialized nature of knowledge. This book therefore looks both backward and forward, on the one hand historicizing concepts of the end and on the other projecting those concepts into the future. It realigns knowledge producers from what we now think of as widely disparate areas around a single question in order to better discern perceived distinctions as well as to reveal shared language, ideals, and aspirations. Chapters focus on areas as diverse as AI; Black Studies; Literary Studies; Political Activism; and the concept of disciplinarity itself.

Bringing together essays from activists such as Ady Barkin in addition to scholars from a wide range of disciplines, these essays aim to uncover a life after disciplinarity for subjects such as English, Classical Studies, and journalism, that face immediate threats to the structure if not the substance of their contributions. The essays in this collection, then–whether reflective, historical, eulogistic, or polemical–may together chart a preliminary course towards the reorganization of knowledge production as a whole.