Re: transcription errors in Foucault

On Fri, 17 Dec 1999, Michal Klincewicz wrote:

> I am still a bit confused by your prersentation. The vitalist
> argument you presented in the earlier part of the article was not
> _explicitly_ congruent to Deleuze's claim. Notice he muddles the
> vitalist claim by 'certain/kind of' and the logic seems to suggest
> that "Life" of Deleuze is not necessarily the vitalist "Life"

Considering Deleuze's enthusiasm for Bergson, one would suspect that it
is.

> but a 'capacity' or an 'ability' to gaze-over and possibly resist.

I'm not sure how this capacity differs from the vitalist "life". (I don't
really know anything about vitalism.)

> Also, the important variable is bio-power--that shift in the 'diagram'
> that changes the technologies of power and focuses them on the body
> and on the forces of life.

On biological life, but not on the "vital" force of life, perhaps ... I
suspect that "life" in the vitalist sense might as well be translated as
"spirit", in something not unlike the sense of Foucault's "Spirit of a
World Without Spirit" (where that spirit is, for Foucault, indeed a
mystery). And then again, is this "spirit" something different from the
"soul" which is the subject of D&P, from the "self" which is the
subject of HS 2 and 3? I suspect it is....

Matthew

---Matthew A. King---Department of Philosophy---York University, Toronto---
"I often wondered why people had to speak. Silence may be a much more
interesting way of having a relationship with people."
----------------------------(Michel Foucault)------------------------------


Partial thread listing: