An interesting topic. On the one hand, it seems to me that refuting 'human
nature' was no more necessary for Foucault than disproving the existence of
God - since the former had already been rendered anathema by Sartre, and the
latter by Marxism and Nietzsche as well as existentialism, they weren't
pressing issues.
On the other hand, Nietzsche was very keen on talking about instincts, and
Foucault quotes him approvingly talking about them, so we can assume that if
instinct is what is meant by 'human nature', Foucault did not deny its
existence.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cordelia Chu" <raccoon@xxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 12:32 PM
Subject: Foucault and Human nature
> Foucault made no secret of his "mistrust" over "human nature" - but did he
> completely, absolutely
> reject existance of "human nature"? Did he ever define what he meant by
> "human nature"? How
> about knee-jerk reflex actions? Hunger/ sex drives? Basic emotions?
> (empathy, anger etc)
>
> -Cordelia
>
>
>
nature' was no more necessary for Foucault than disproving the existence of
God - since the former had already been rendered anathema by Sartre, and the
latter by Marxism and Nietzsche as well as existentialism, they weren't
pressing issues.
On the other hand, Nietzsche was very keen on talking about instincts, and
Foucault quotes him approvingly talking about them, so we can assume that if
instinct is what is meant by 'human nature', Foucault did not deny its
existence.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cordelia Chu" <raccoon@xxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 12:32 PM
Subject: Foucault and Human nature
> Foucault made no secret of his "mistrust" over "human nature" - but did he
> completely, absolutely
> reject existance of "human nature"? Did he ever define what he meant by
> "human nature"? How
> about knee-jerk reflex actions? Hunger/ sex drives? Basic emotions?
> (empathy, anger etc)
>
> -Cordelia
>
>
>