Kevin Turner wrote:
> I agree with what you say, but just because there was no "explicitly"
> conceptualisation of power in these texts does not mean that there was no
> (operative) model of power. As I said, I think if one reads these texts
> there is quite clearly a model of power being mobilised. This model, which
> one can retrospectively characterise as the Reichian hypothesis, was
> unathematised, untheorised, and thus "implicit," but it was nonetheless
> present.
I can't find any implicit Reichian hypothesis in Foucault's early work.
can you point to where you feel this is the case?