Hey out there - can some one help me out? I am seeking a
solution here---does Foucault have a coneotion of historical
change? I am inclined to think he does, and that it hinges
on his analysis of "events"; What is his coneption of
events? Are they singular, local, and specific? Or can we
speak of events as being general, or generalizable?
In The Archeology of Knowledge, he speaks of statements as
events, and they seem to have soem kind of causal impact on
discursive formations; on the other hand, he speaks of
archives as "events" of discourse. In Nietzsche, Genalogy,
History events are supposed to have some larger,
transformational capacity. Is there a distinciton to be
made between his (late) archeological and his (early -1970)
genealogical coneption of historical change? Am i missing
something - should I be looking "beyond the event"? Does he
not care what factors contribute to the historiocal shifts
in discursive practices which he so often describes?
solution here---does Foucault have a coneotion of historical
change? I am inclined to think he does, and that it hinges
on his analysis of "events"; What is his coneption of
events? Are they singular, local, and specific? Or can we
speak of events as being general, or generalizable?
In The Archeology of Knowledge, he speaks of statements as
events, and they seem to have soem kind of causal impact on
discursive formations; on the other hand, he speaks of
archives as "events" of discourse. In Nietzsche, Genalogy,
History events are supposed to have some larger,
transformational capacity. Is there a distinciton to be
made between his (late) archeological and his (early -1970)
genealogical coneption of historical change? Am i missing
something - should I be looking "beyond the event"? Does he
not care what factors contribute to the historiocal shifts
in discursive practices which he so often describes?