I think that >The Order of Things< is absolutely difficult for
undergraduates and would aggree with Eric Angel who mentioned >Discipline
and Punish< as well as >The History of Sexuality< and of course >The Order
of Discourse< gives some of the important insights into the thinking of
Foucault, not to speak of some of the interviews one of which is published
in >Technologies of the self< (done by Rux Martin)
Hanne
----------
> Von: Rob Leventhal <rsl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> An: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Betreff: Re: undergrad texts
> Datum: Montag, 5. Januar 1998 16:11
>
> I think that the _Archaeology_ is Foucault's unsuccessful attempt to
codify
> what he was doing. It is vague on some of the most important
> theoretical/methodological issues of his work, e.g. the definition of the
> "statement". He says what it is not, but never exactly what it is.
>
> _Discipline and Punish_ and _The Order of Things_ are better. Also, for
> undergrads, the elusive but interesting essay "What is Enlightenment?"
and
> some of the essays contained in the volume _Power/Knowledge_.
>
> Rob
>
> At 09:34 AM 1/5/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >On Sun, 4 Jan 1998, Clare O'Farrell wrote:
> >
> >> Eric Angel mentions that it was Discipline and Punish and The History
of
> >> Sexuality that first got him interested in Foucault. For me it was two
> >> texts - the first 'The Situation of Cuvier in the history of biology'
> >> followed by _The Archaeology_ I thought the Archaeology was a
wonderful
> >> book - it was certainly the one that got me thoroughly hooked on
Foucault.
> >
> >Speaking of which: a while ago, I read a book (can't remember which;
> >maybe Megill, but I don't think so) which claimed that AK must be
> >read as a parody of Descartes's _Discourse on Method_: that if you read
> >it straight, you just don't get it. Personally, I don't much see the
> >connection (and anyway I'm inclined to agree with Rorty that AK is
> >Foucault's "least successful book"). Comments?
> >
> >Matthew
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >"There is but one truly important philosophical problem,
> > and that is suicide." (Albert Camus, _The Myth of Sisyphus_)
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >Matthew A. King - Department of Philosophy - McMaster University
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Dr. Rob Leventhal, President
> Blueridge Internet Technologies and Services, Inc.
> Voice (804) 977-6022 FAX (804) 977-6096
> Corporate Page: http://www.bitlink.com
> Personal Page: http://www.bitlink.com/~rsl/home.html
> E-Mail: rsl@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Everywhere we remain unfree and chained to technology, whether
> we passionately affirm or deny it. But we are delivered over to it in the
> worst way when we regard it as something neutral." --Heidegger
>
undergraduates and would aggree with Eric Angel who mentioned >Discipline
and Punish< as well as >The History of Sexuality< and of course >The Order
of Discourse< gives some of the important insights into the thinking of
Foucault, not to speak of some of the interviews one of which is published
in >Technologies of the self< (done by Rux Martin)
Hanne
----------
> Von: Rob Leventhal <rsl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> An: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Betreff: Re: undergrad texts
> Datum: Montag, 5. Januar 1998 16:11
>
> I think that the _Archaeology_ is Foucault's unsuccessful attempt to
codify
> what he was doing. It is vague on some of the most important
> theoretical/methodological issues of his work, e.g. the definition of the
> "statement". He says what it is not, but never exactly what it is.
>
> _Discipline and Punish_ and _The Order of Things_ are better. Also, for
> undergrads, the elusive but interesting essay "What is Enlightenment?"
and
> some of the essays contained in the volume _Power/Knowledge_.
>
> Rob
>
> At 09:34 AM 1/5/98 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >On Sun, 4 Jan 1998, Clare O'Farrell wrote:
> >
> >> Eric Angel mentions that it was Discipline and Punish and The History
of
> >> Sexuality that first got him interested in Foucault. For me it was two
> >> texts - the first 'The Situation of Cuvier in the history of biology'
> >> followed by _The Archaeology_ I thought the Archaeology was a
wonderful
> >> book - it was certainly the one that got me thoroughly hooked on
Foucault.
> >
> >Speaking of which: a while ago, I read a book (can't remember which;
> >maybe Megill, but I don't think so) which claimed that AK must be
> >read as a parody of Descartes's _Discourse on Method_: that if you read
> >it straight, you just don't get it. Personally, I don't much see the
> >connection (and anyway I'm inclined to agree with Rorty that AK is
> >Foucault's "least successful book"). Comments?
> >
> >Matthew
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >"There is but one truly important philosophical problem,
> > and that is suicide." (Albert Camus, _The Myth of Sisyphus_)
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >Matthew A. King - Department of Philosophy - McMaster University
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Dr. Rob Leventhal, President
> Blueridge Internet Technologies and Services, Inc.
> Voice (804) 977-6022 FAX (804) 977-6096
> Corporate Page: http://www.bitlink.com
> Personal Page: http://www.bitlink.com/~rsl/home.html
> E-Mail: rsl@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Everywhere we remain unfree and chained to technology, whether
> we passionately affirm or deny it. But we are delivered over to it in the
> worst way when we regard it as something neutral." --Heidegger
>