Thanks for all the information. It has been very helpful.
On 9/24/07, Kevin Turner <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Clare
>
> So, regarding madness you would say that at the archaeological level
> Foucault looked at the formation of madness as an object of knowledge and
> the asylum warden, doctor, psychiatrist as subject who knows; whereas at the
> genealogical level Foucault looked at the formation of madness as error,
> fault or sickness and reason as truth of the world, and then the truth of
> man.
>
> I think that is a highly usable way of thinking about the difference
> between archaeology and genealogy.
>
> It also shows how genealogy was at work, however implicitly, in History of
> Madness, and The birth of the Clinic; and demonstrates how archaeology was
> at work in Discipline and Punish and later texts.
>
> regards - k
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: c.ofarrell@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:14:14 +1000
> > To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Genealogy Archaeology Divide
> >
> > Can I just add a passage from my own book Michel Foucault. Sage, 2005
> > pp. 68-69 to this discussion. Foucault also uses a whole range of
> > other terms which do the same work as archaeology and genealogy - eg
> > history of thought, regimes of truth, the history of the present.
> >
> > If one is considering practicalities, the reality is that there is not
> > really a great deal of difference between the tools Foucault uses to
> > engage in either archaeology or genealogy. The distinction is to be
> > found rather, in how Foucault characterizes that level where the
> > historical orders of knowledge and culture emerge, and where objects
> > of knowledge are formed. Or as Foucault puts it succinctly in `The
> > order of discourse': 'The difference between the critical and the
> > genealogical enterprise is not so much a difference of object or
> > domain, but of point of attack, perspective and delimitation' (OD:
> > 72). If archaeology addresses a level at which differences and
> > similarities are determined, a level where things are simply organized
> > to produce manageable forms of knowledge, the stakes are much higher
> > for genealogy.
> > Genealogy deals with precisely the same substrata of knowledge and
> > culture, but Foucault now describes it as a level where the grounds of
> > the true and the false come to be distinguished via mechanisms of
> > power. In the case of archaeology, patterns of differences and
> > similarities form in close relation to something Foucault describes as
> > `ideology' or more generally as `non-discursive practices'. But the
> > latter were not primary. As for genealogy, the historical division
> > between the true and the false is more directly the result of power.
> > Further, in the early 1970s, Foucault argues that power is prior to
> > and produces knowledge. The differences between the two approaches in
> > Foucault's work can be seen in comparing two statements about the
> > level underlying knowledge. In 1967, he says:
> >
> > Beneath what science knows about itself is something that it doesn't
> > know; and its history, its becoming, its periods and accidents obey a
> > certain number of laws and determinations. These laws and
> > determinations are what I have tried to bring to light. I have tried
> > to unearth an autonomous domain that would be the unconscious of
> > knowledge, which would have its own rules, just as the individual
> > human unconscious has its own rules and determinations. (1968d: 54
> > mod.)
> >
> > These 'rules and determinations' underlie the historical organization
> > of similarities and differences in knowledge and culture. By 1971,
> > Foucault had shifted his way of describing this `unconscious' and it
> > had become a matter of the division between the true and the false,
> > between inclusion and exclusion; it was more clearly an exercise of
> > power, rather than simple organization. He explains: `My problem is
> > essentially the definition of the implicit systems in which we find
> > ourselves prisoners; what I would like to grasp is the system of
> > limits and exclusion which we practice without realising it; I would
> > like to make the cultural unconscious apparent' (1971g: 73). In short,
> > archaeology is about the `conditions of possibility' which give rise
> > to knowledge whereas genealogy is about the `constraints' that limit
> > the orders of knowledge. In both instances, Foucault is dealing with
> > the same level, he has simply changed his emphasis and way of viewing
> > it.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clare
> > *******************************************
> > Clare O'Farrell
> > http://www.michel-foucault.com
> > *******************************************
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> KEEP SPYWARE OFF YOUR COMPUTER - Protect your computer with Spyware
> Terminator!
> Visit http://www.spywareterminator.com/install and find out more!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
--
Jared Kennard
Intermountain Sales & Marketing, Inc.
60 North Cutler Drive, #103
Phone: (801) 936-0228
Fax: (801) 936-0227
On 9/24/07, Kevin Turner <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Clare
>
> So, regarding madness you would say that at the archaeological level
> Foucault looked at the formation of madness as an object of knowledge and
> the asylum warden, doctor, psychiatrist as subject who knows; whereas at the
> genealogical level Foucault looked at the formation of madness as error,
> fault or sickness and reason as truth of the world, and then the truth of
> man.
>
> I think that is a highly usable way of thinking about the difference
> between archaeology and genealogy.
>
> It also shows how genealogy was at work, however implicitly, in History of
> Madness, and The birth of the Clinic; and demonstrates how archaeology was
> at work in Discipline and Punish and later texts.
>
> regards - k
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: c.ofarrell@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:14:14 +1000
> > To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Genealogy Archaeology Divide
> >
> > Can I just add a passage from my own book Michel Foucault. Sage, 2005
> > pp. 68-69 to this discussion. Foucault also uses a whole range of
> > other terms which do the same work as archaeology and genealogy - eg
> > history of thought, regimes of truth, the history of the present.
> >
> > If one is considering practicalities, the reality is that there is not
> > really a great deal of difference between the tools Foucault uses to
> > engage in either archaeology or genealogy. The distinction is to be
> > found rather, in how Foucault characterizes that level where the
> > historical orders of knowledge and culture emerge, and where objects
> > of knowledge are formed. Or as Foucault puts it succinctly in `The
> > order of discourse': 'The difference between the critical and the
> > genealogical enterprise is not so much a difference of object or
> > domain, but of point of attack, perspective and delimitation' (OD:
> > 72). If archaeology addresses a level at which differences and
> > similarities are determined, a level where things are simply organized
> > to produce manageable forms of knowledge, the stakes are much higher
> > for genealogy.
> > Genealogy deals with precisely the same substrata of knowledge and
> > culture, but Foucault now describes it as a level where the grounds of
> > the true and the false come to be distinguished via mechanisms of
> > power. In the case of archaeology, patterns of differences and
> > similarities form in close relation to something Foucault describes as
> > `ideology' or more generally as `non-discursive practices'. But the
> > latter were not primary. As for genealogy, the historical division
> > between the true and the false is more directly the result of power.
> > Further, in the early 1970s, Foucault argues that power is prior to
> > and produces knowledge. The differences between the two approaches in
> > Foucault's work can be seen in comparing two statements about the
> > level underlying knowledge. In 1967, he says:
> >
> > Beneath what science knows about itself is something that it doesn't
> > know; and its history, its becoming, its periods and accidents obey a
> > certain number of laws and determinations. These laws and
> > determinations are what I have tried to bring to light. I have tried
> > to unearth an autonomous domain that would be the unconscious of
> > knowledge, which would have its own rules, just as the individual
> > human unconscious has its own rules and determinations. (1968d: 54
> > mod.)
> >
> > These 'rules and determinations' underlie the historical organization
> > of similarities and differences in knowledge and culture. By 1971,
> > Foucault had shifted his way of describing this `unconscious' and it
> > had become a matter of the division between the true and the false,
> > between inclusion and exclusion; it was more clearly an exercise of
> > power, rather than simple organization. He explains: `My problem is
> > essentially the definition of the implicit systems in which we find
> > ourselves prisoners; what I would like to grasp is the system of
> > limits and exclusion which we practice without realising it; I would
> > like to make the cultural unconscious apparent' (1971g: 73). In short,
> > archaeology is about the `conditions of possibility' which give rise
> > to knowledge whereas genealogy is about the `constraints' that limit
> > the orders of knowledge. In both instances, Foucault is dealing with
> > the same level, he has simply changed his emphasis and way of viewing
> > it.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clare
> > *******************************************
> > Clare O'Farrell
> > http://www.michel-foucault.com
> > *******************************************
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> KEEP SPYWARE OFF YOUR COMPUTER - Protect your computer with Spyware
> Terminator!
> Visit http://www.spywareterminator.com/install and find out more!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
--
Jared Kennard
Intermountain Sales & Marketing, Inc.
60 North Cutler Drive, #103
Phone: (801) 936-0228
Fax: (801) 936-0227