Hi everyone,
My Master thesis was about the "new form of right" ("nuovo diritto", "nouveau droit", "direito novo" etc.) mentioned by Foucault in his lecture of 14th January 1976, included in the course "Society must be defended" and the well-known text "Two Lectures". Here below is the abstract in English (the thesis was written in Portuguese), and I hope it can help to understand my opinion about this idea, although I hadn't read the Agamben book when I wrote it.
Best wishes to all,
João Chaves
Catholic University of Pernambuco (Brazil)
jfcchaves@xxxxxxxxxx
CHAVES, João Freitas de Castro. The problem of a ?new form of right? in Michel Foucault: between resistance and the Outside. Master in Law thesis. Recife: Federal University of Pernambuco, 2006, 200 p.
The subject of this work is the proposal of a ?new form of right?, as indicated by the French thinker Michel Foucault in one of the lectures of the course Society must be defended in 1976. Considering antiquated the present comprehension of Law, the author suggested the research of a new approach for this question, towards an antidisciplinarian Law, but also free from the principle of sovereignty. The absence of further enlightenment by Foucault about his proposal and its consequent abandon promoted a division. On one hand, some say that this ?new form of right? is almost useless for the legal theory. On the other hand, some believe that it is possible to develop this ?new form of right? as a critique to current legal thought. To answer this dilemma, this work has as first aim the connection of this ?new form of right? with other of Michel Foucault?s Law citations, before and after 1976. After that, the second aim is to understand which general traces of the author?s work justify the proposal of a ?new form of right?, supposing that they would be responsible for the difficulties of its explanation. As for the first aim, the reading of Foucault?s books, courses and other texts reveal that he never had any special attention regarding Law, and did not intend to create a general vision of this subject. More than that, the 1976 proposal of a ?new form of right? was not revisited by the author and became a forgotten point in his work. As for the second aim, the research identified that the ?new form of right? is a consequence of, on one side, the foucaldian effort to produce a resistance capable of escaping from power relations and thus from the ?expected resistance paradox?, and, on another side, of his strong appeal for the Outside, as described by Gilles Deleuze. As it is impossible, in Foucault?s philosophical project, to admit a knowledge beyond the knowledge, disconnected from the historical power relations and based on a resistance from the Outside, the conclusion is that this ?new form of right? is an impossible hypothesis. In any case, in spite of revealing significant traces of Foucault?s thought, it cannot be developed in pure foucaldian terms.
Keywords: new form of right; resistance; Outside.
In the Italian text of the Lecture of January 14
> 1976, which actually was the first publication of
> that Lecture it is called "un nuovo diritto, che
> sarebbe sí antidisciplinare, ma nello stesso
> tempo affrancato dal principo della
> sovranitá" (Microfisica del Potere, p.194), also
> see French translation in Dits et Ecrits III, p. 189.
>
> yours
> machiel karskens
>
>
>
>
> At 22:17 13-3-2008, you wrote:
> >Hi everyone
> >
> >Angela's lead hs proved productive, not the text by Catherine Mills, but the
> >author herself has told me that Foucault calls for a "new right" that is no
> >longer tied to sovereignty or discipline in the second lecture of the "Two
> >Lectures" essay published in Power/Knowledge.
> >
> >That is a start on the quest to find this discarded object of the
> >playground!
> >
> >Martin
> >
> >On 03/03/2008, martin hardie <martin.hardie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > HI everyone
> > >
> > > Something I have wondered for a while and it has resurfaced.
> > >
> > > There is a reference to Foucault and the new lawy/er on page 63 of Giorgio
> > > Agamben's State of Exception. Agamben doesn't reference Foucault at all in
> > > the text. Does anyone know where this is from?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > martin
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Martin Hardie
> > > Law Lecturer
> > > Institute of Koorie Education,
> > > Deakin University (Geelong Campus)
> > > Pigdons Road, Waurn Ponds,
> > > Victoria, 3216, Australia.
> > > http://www.deakin.edu.au/ike/
> > > Tel: +61 (0)3 5227 2918
> > > Fax: + 61 (0)3 5227 2019
> > > Mobile: + 61 (0)433281779
> > > mhardie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > martin.hardie@xxxxxxxxx
> > > skype/irc: auskadi
> > >
> > >
> > > "I write so that people remember that I was here," Miguel de Unamuno
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Martin Hardie
> >Law Lecturer
> >Institute of Koorie Education,
> >Deakin University (Geelong Campus)
> >Pigdons Road, Waurn Ponds,
> >Victoria, 3216, Australia.
> >http://www.deakin.edu.au/ike/
> >Tel: +61 (0)3 5227 2918
> >Fax: + 61 (0)3 5227 2019
> >mhardie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >martin.hardie@xxxxxxxxx
> >skype/irc: auskadi
> >
> >Love is never directed toward this or that property of the loved one (being
> >blond, being small, being tender, being lame), but neither does it neglect
> >the properties in favour of an insipid generality (universal love): The
> >lover want the loved one with all of its predicates, its being such as it
> >is.
> >_______________________________________________
> >Foucault-L mailing list
>
>
>
>
> Prof. Machiel Karskens
> social and political philosophy
> Faculty of Philosophy
> Radboud University Nijmegen - The Netherlands
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>