Re: [Foucault-L] The agent discussion once more

isn't it recognized that the piece titled 'foucault, michel, 1926-' written
by maurice florence does what others are suggesting 'what is enlightenment'
does? the first edition of the 'cambridge companion to foucault' edited by
gary gutting claims that the author this paper was foucault himself.
foucault does claim to be at home in the critical tradition of kant, but
this is not a claim that he is an enlightenment thinker. foucault goes to
great lengths to 'critique' critique itself. i think claire has already
outlined much of what distinguishes foucault's thought from that tradition.
all i would add is that to appreciate the extent to which foucault was not
an enlightenment thinker, one would need to search out the nietzschean
element of his thinking. deleuze's book 'nietzsche and philosophy' is one
example wherein a 'mood' can be created that facilitates this. foucault
credits nietzsche, and heidegger, as impacting greatly on his ability to
write, but he rarely cites them. pehaps in neitzsche we can discover the
preliminary responses to these questions, or at least establish the mood
required to engage with them. this is of little help, and i apologize for
this. just some ramblings.

cheers

Folow-ups
  • Re: [Foucault-L] The agent discussion once more
    • From: peter chamberlain
  • Re: [Foucault-L] The agent discussion once more
    • From: tsuru
  • Replies
    Re: [Foucault-L] The agent discussion once more, c.ofarrell
    Re: [Foucault-L] The agent discussion once more, tsuru
    Re: [Foucault-L] The agent discussion once more, tsuru
    Partial thread listing: