Is there something that characterizes scholarly thought, and distinguishes it from non-scholarly thought? It is
clear that scholarly thought can be distinguished in terms of who produces it (quite circularly, scholars, on which
more momentarily), for whom it is produced, and with what intent. The producers of scholarly thought are often
conscious of themselves as engaged in producing “scholarship” or intellectual thought, and are usually aware of
the likely audience for such products. In addition, such producers (scholars) typically have a purpose in mind
when they engage in scholarly work, from such general notions as “advancing knowledge” to more concrete
attempts to address specific problems. Usually, though by no means always, societies have authorized some
members to produce scholarship, and have developed more or less formal mechanisms for determining who is
so authorized. One predominant mechanism is the educational system, and the credentialing that typically
accompanies this form of legitimation. Once designated as “scholars” these individuals are often accorded the
time necessary for cogent reflection, and their output (at this point often evaluated by their peers) can be designated
scholarship. We are also cognizant of, and want to note here, the exclusionary implications of these kinds of
credentialing processes. As we examine below, the production of knowledge and its designation and acceptance
as legitimate and useful often constitute important sites of struggle