Hi Clare
As always, the definitive answer! See you next week when I
return from HK (I slipped away with Elizabeth who is over
here for a week to teach)
Cheers
PeterO
---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 22:12:47 +1000
>From: "Clare O'Farrell" <panoptique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: happy positivism
>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>On the subject of 'happy positivism'. There was a well-
known review
>of The Order of Things published in Les Temps Modernes
(Sartre's
>journal) in 1967 by Simone de Beauvoir's
secretary/assistant Sylvie
>Le Bon. The title of this piece was 'Un positiviste
desespere: Michel
>Foucault' (a desperate positivist). Georges Canguilhem
referred to
>this criticism in his own 1967 review of Foucault's work in
the
>journal Critique. Obviously the term positivist was
intended as an
>insult in relation to Foucault's 'structuralist' stance.
Thus
>Foucault's remark about being happy to be a positivist was
an oblique
>response to this (existentialist) criticism.
>
> Happy would definitely be the right word in this context!
There are
>quite a few problems with that first translation of The
order of
>discourse.
>
>At 23:53 -0400 6/10/04, Brodie Richards wrote:
>>I do not recall Foucault using the exact phrase "happy
positivism"
>>not at least in the English translation of Archealogy of
Knowledge.
>>What he does say about it is on page 125 of A/K and what I
think
>>leads to the phrase being created by commentators is the
following
>>passage. He says: "If, by substituting the analysis of
rarity for
>>the search for totalities, the description of relations of
>>exteriority for the theme of transcendental foundation,
the analysis
>>of accumulations for the quest of origin, one is a
positivst, then I
>>am quite happy to be one." This is referring back, on the
same
>>page, to his "willingness" to use the term "positivty" to
describe
>>the emergence of a discursive formation. So, unless I am
wrong, F.
>>himself does say he is employing a "happy positivism". In
this
>>sense, the term positivity is more important to his
argument and to
>>any argument about what he meant than the phrase "happy
positivism."
>>"Happy positivism" has a polemical usfulness but not much
else in my
>>opinion.
>
>--
>Clare
>************************************************
>Clare O'Farrell
>email: panoptique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>website: http://www.foucault.qut.edu.au
>************************************************
As always, the definitive answer! See you next week when I
return from HK (I slipped away with Elizabeth who is over
here for a week to teach)
Cheers
PeterO
---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 22:12:47 +1000
>From: "Clare O'Farrell" <panoptique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: happy positivism
>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>On the subject of 'happy positivism'. There was a well-
known review
>of The Order of Things published in Les Temps Modernes
(Sartre's
>journal) in 1967 by Simone de Beauvoir's
secretary/assistant Sylvie
>Le Bon. The title of this piece was 'Un positiviste
desespere: Michel
>Foucault' (a desperate positivist). Georges Canguilhem
referred to
>this criticism in his own 1967 review of Foucault's work in
the
>journal Critique. Obviously the term positivist was
intended as an
>insult in relation to Foucault's 'structuralist' stance.
Thus
>Foucault's remark about being happy to be a positivist was
an oblique
>response to this (existentialist) criticism.
>
> Happy would definitely be the right word in this context!
There are
>quite a few problems with that first translation of The
order of
>discourse.
>
>At 23:53 -0400 6/10/04, Brodie Richards wrote:
>>I do not recall Foucault using the exact phrase "happy
positivism"
>>not at least in the English translation of Archealogy of
Knowledge.
>>What he does say about it is on page 125 of A/K and what I
think
>>leads to the phrase being created by commentators is the
following
>>passage. He says: "If, by substituting the analysis of
rarity for
>>the search for totalities, the description of relations of
>>exteriority for the theme of transcendental foundation,
the analysis
>>of accumulations for the quest of origin, one is a
positivst, then I
>>am quite happy to be one." This is referring back, on the
same
>>page, to his "willingness" to use the term "positivty" to
describe
>>the emergence of a discursive formation. So, unless I am
wrong, F.
>>himself does say he is employing a "happy positivism". In
this
>>sense, the term positivity is more important to his
argument and to
>>any argument about what he meant than the phrase "happy
positivism."
>>"Happy positivism" has a polemical usfulness but not much
else in my
>>opinion.
>
>--
>Clare
>************************************************
>Clare O'Farrell
>email: panoptique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>website: http://www.foucault.qut.edu.au
>************************************************