Dear Foucaultdians,
I need some advice from you in the following question.
In L'archeologie du savoir Foucault often refers to Les mots et les
choses.
Can you say that his methodical approach in Les mots et les choses is the
one he describes in L'archeologie du savoir (not exactly the one but in
principle, esp. concerning the four different fields he describes in the
second chapter of L'archeologie)?
Or is Archeologie du savoir a late reflection of the method in his
earlier works presenting an idealtypus he never reached because he was
then not as clear about it as in L'archeologie du savoir? (in this case
you cannot read les mots et les choses with the view of a discourse
analysist in the sense of archeologie du savoir).
Brief, is it possible to read les mots et les choses with the methodical
view of L'archeologie du savoir?
I would be pleased if you could recommend some literature to this.
thanks a lot
sonja
I need some advice from you in the following question.
In L'archeologie du savoir Foucault often refers to Les mots et les
choses.
Can you say that his methodical approach in Les mots et les choses is the
one he describes in L'archeologie du savoir (not exactly the one but in
principle, esp. concerning the four different fields he describes in the
second chapter of L'archeologie)?
Or is Archeologie du savoir a late reflection of the method in his
earlier works presenting an idealtypus he never reached because he was
then not as clear about it as in L'archeologie du savoir? (in this case
you cannot read les mots et les choses with the view of a discourse
analysist in the sense of archeologie du savoir).
Brief, is it possible to read les mots et les choses with the methodical
view of L'archeologie du savoir?
I would be pleased if you could recommend some literature to this.
thanks a lot
sonja