Hi Edwin, Timothy and Kevin,
Thank you SO much. I will definitely take your advice; talk to you soon.
Teresa
On 5/13/08, Kevin Turner <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Teresa,
>
> I also think you are on the right track...
>
> In his highly problematic intellectual history of Foucault ("Foucault
> 2.0"), Eric Paras refers to the 1983 lectures discussed by Timothy.
>
> Here Paras notes that the first of these lectures (5 January, 1983)
> contained near complete versions of both 'What is Enlightenment?' and the
> 'Introduction' to "The Use of Pleasure."
>
> As Paras put it, 'Foucault presented...his preface to the study of
> aesthetics of existence and his account of the Enlightenment ethos as a
> single thread' (Paras, 2006: 147).
>
> Regards,
> Kevin.
>
> p.s. Graham Burchell is generally view as being a good translator of
> Foucault's work into English.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: autrement@xxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Tue, 13 May 2008 12:47:51 +0800
> > To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] 'care of the self' as an awakening...question
> >
> > Dear Teresa,
> >
> > I think you are definitely on the right track with your questions. There
> > is
> > no doubt that there is a connection between the sort of "conversion"
> > (turning around of the soul) that Socrates provokes, and the forms of
> > "critique" that characterise the Enlightenment. You should look, in
> > particular, at Foucault's 1978 lecture "What is Critique?" which draws a
> > line between the "spiritual" exercises of antiquity, the Biblical
> > criticism
> > of the early Reformation, and Enlightenment, and modern, forms of
> > critique
> > and resistance to government. For Foucault, Socrates stands at the
> > beginning
> > of this tradition. In his last course at the College de France (not yet
> > published) he makes similar connections between the ancient practice of
> > 'parrhesia', especially in its Cynic manifestation, and modern critique.
> >
> > Timothy O'Leary
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Edwin Ng <edwin.a.c.ng@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Teresa,
> >>
> >> Have you consulted the *History of Sexuality: The Care of the Self*? I
> >> was
> >> just reading "Part Two: The Cultivation of the Self" when I looked up
> at
> >> the
> >> monitor and saw your email. I think what Foucault discusses there would
> >> clarify some of your questions. *Epimeleia heautou* involves a certain
> >> modality of reason and Foucault finds this most pronounced in
> >> Epictetus' *Discourses:
> >>
> >>
> >> *'Man... must attend to himself: not, however, as a consequence of some
> >> defect that would put him in a situation of need and make him in this
> >> respect inferior to the animals, but because the god [Zeus] deemed it
> >> right
> >> that he be able to make free use of himself; and it was for this
> purpose
> >> that he endowed him with reason. The latter is not to be understood as
> a
> >> substitute for natural faculties that might be lacking; on the contrary
> >> it
> >> is the faculty that enables one to use, at the right time and in the
> >> right
> >> way, the other faculties. In fact, it is this absolutely singular
> >> faculty
> >> that is capable of making use of itself, for it is capable of
> >> "contemplating
> >> both itself and everything else" By crowning with this reasoning
> faculty
> >> all
> >> that is already given to us by nature, Zeus gave us the possibility and
> >> the
> >> duty to take care of ourselves. It is insofar as he is free and
> >> reasonable
> >> that man is the natural being that has been committed to the care of
> >> himself' (1986, p.47).
> >>
> >> I can't comment on the accuracy of your suggestions but it seems to me
> >> that
> >> the above might be relevant to your questions. All the best.
> >>
> >> Edwin
> >>
> >>
> >> 2008/5/13 Teresa Mayne <teresa.mayne@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >>
> >>> Hi Erik,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for being so direct. I'm probably not explaining myself
> >>> properly,
> >>> I have the habit of thinking in questions, so I will try to be more
> >> clear.
> >>>
> >>> I know the difference between fifth century B.C. Greece and the period
> >> of
> >>> the Enlightenment. What I'm referring to specifically is Foucault's
> >> text
> >>> "What is Enlightenment?". He describes Kant's opinion of the
> >>> Enlightenment
> >>> as an 'exit' from the status of 'immaturity'. The 'maturity' that is
> >>> referred to is "a modification of the preexisting relation linking
> >>> will,
> >>> authority, and the use of reason". In "The Hermeneutics of the
> >>> Subject"
> >>> Foucault outlines three characteristics of the 'care of the self', the
> >>> 'epimeleia heautou'. Firstly, "the epimeleia heautou is an attitude
> >>> towards
> >>> the self, others, and the world". Would it be accurate to link this,
> >>> in
> >>> the
> >>> history of thought, with "a modification of the preexisting relation
> >> [of]
> >>> authority"? Secondly, "being concerned about oneself implies that we
> >> look
> >>> away from the outside to [one-self]". Would it be accurate to link
> the
> >>> emergence of the 'care of the self' with a "modification of the
> >>> preexisting
> >>> relation [of] will"? Thirdly, "the epimeleia also always designates a
> >>> number of actions exercised on the self by the self, actions by which
> >> one
> >>> takes responsibility for oneself and by which one changes, purifies,
> >>> transforms, and transfigures oneself". Would it be accurate to link
> >> this
> >>> with reason (an intellectual action that is "exercised on the self by
> >> the
> >>> self")? Therefore in the history of thought are there correlations
> >>> between
> >>> the viewpoint of the epimeleia heautou and Foucault's interpretation
> of
> >>> how
> >>> Kant views the 'maturity' of the Enlightenment? I hope this clarifies
> >> my
> >>> question.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Teresa
> >>>
> >>> On 5/12/08, Erik Hoogcarspel <jehms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Teresa for giving me the opportunity to read the text again.
> >>>> Teresa Mayne schreef:
> >>>>> Foucault in *The Hermeneutics of the Subject,* the translations of
> >> his
> >>>>> lectures from the College de France between 1981 – 1982, states that
> >>> "in
> >>>> his
> >>>>> activity of encouraging others to attend to themselves Socrates says
> >>>> that
> >>>>> with regard to his fellow citizens his role is that of someone who
> >>>> awakens
> >>>>> them. The care of the self will thus be looked upon as the moment
> >> of
> >>>> the
> >>>>> first awakening".
> >>>> The text says 'Socrate est celui qui veille à ce que les concitoyens
> >> 'se
> >>>> soicient d'euxmêmes'. I would translate this as 'Socrates is the one
> >> who
> >>>> sees to it that his fellow citizens take care of themselves'. I don't
> >>>> know which translation you use, but it seems that reading it is a
> >>>> complete waste of time. Perhaps you should think of better things to
> >> do
> >>>> with it like lighting a barbeque or putting a plant on it.
> >>>>> Does this awakening correspond in any way to the
> >>>>> awakening of the Enlightenment, which Kant interprets as a way that
> >> we
> >>>> can
> >>>>> free ourselves from the status of immaturity? What I mean is, is
> >>>> Foucault's
> >>>>> interpretation of Kant another way of formulating how the 'care of
> >> the
> >>>> self'
> >>>>> can be awakened yet again? And then is the 'first awakening' a
> >>>> constant,
> >>>>> unchanging awakening that is reborn again and again at various times
> >>>> during
> >>>>> history? I'm thinking of Parmenides here.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Foucault goes on to describe the kinds of personal training or
> askesis
> >>>> in antiquity. He stresses that for all but Plato taking care of
> >> oneself
> >>>> was a constant necessity if one would want to have an accomplished
> >> life.
> >>>> This has nothing to do with the period called enlightenment, which is
> >>>> supposed to be the period when the confidence in the Bible was
> >> replaced
> >>>> with confidence in the light of reason.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Erik
> >>>>
> >>>> Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejehms> <
> >> http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejehms>
> >>>> Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950
> >>>> Productie: http://stores.lulu.com/jehmsstudio
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
Thank you SO much. I will definitely take your advice; talk to you soon.
Teresa
On 5/13/08, Kevin Turner <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Teresa,
>
> I also think you are on the right track...
>
> In his highly problematic intellectual history of Foucault ("Foucault
> 2.0"), Eric Paras refers to the 1983 lectures discussed by Timothy.
>
> Here Paras notes that the first of these lectures (5 January, 1983)
> contained near complete versions of both 'What is Enlightenment?' and the
> 'Introduction' to "The Use of Pleasure."
>
> As Paras put it, 'Foucault presented...his preface to the study of
> aesthetics of existence and his account of the Enlightenment ethos as a
> single thread' (Paras, 2006: 147).
>
> Regards,
> Kevin.
>
> p.s. Graham Burchell is generally view as being a good translator of
> Foucault's work into English.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: autrement@xxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Tue, 13 May 2008 12:47:51 +0800
> > To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] 'care of the self' as an awakening...question
> >
> > Dear Teresa,
> >
> > I think you are definitely on the right track with your questions. There
> > is
> > no doubt that there is a connection between the sort of "conversion"
> > (turning around of the soul) that Socrates provokes, and the forms of
> > "critique" that characterise the Enlightenment. You should look, in
> > particular, at Foucault's 1978 lecture "What is Critique?" which draws a
> > line between the "spiritual" exercises of antiquity, the Biblical
> > criticism
> > of the early Reformation, and Enlightenment, and modern, forms of
> > critique
> > and resistance to government. For Foucault, Socrates stands at the
> > beginning
> > of this tradition. In his last course at the College de France (not yet
> > published) he makes similar connections between the ancient practice of
> > 'parrhesia', especially in its Cynic manifestation, and modern critique.
> >
> > Timothy O'Leary
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Edwin Ng <edwin.a.c.ng@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Teresa,
> >>
> >> Have you consulted the *History of Sexuality: The Care of the Self*? I
> >> was
> >> just reading "Part Two: The Cultivation of the Self" when I looked up
> at
> >> the
> >> monitor and saw your email. I think what Foucault discusses there would
> >> clarify some of your questions. *Epimeleia heautou* involves a certain
> >> modality of reason and Foucault finds this most pronounced in
> >> Epictetus' *Discourses:
> >>
> >>
> >> *'Man... must attend to himself: not, however, as a consequence of some
> >> defect that would put him in a situation of need and make him in this
> >> respect inferior to the animals, but because the god [Zeus] deemed it
> >> right
> >> that he be able to make free use of himself; and it was for this
> purpose
> >> that he endowed him with reason. The latter is not to be understood as
> a
> >> substitute for natural faculties that might be lacking; on the contrary
> >> it
> >> is the faculty that enables one to use, at the right time and in the
> >> right
> >> way, the other faculties. In fact, it is this absolutely singular
> >> faculty
> >> that is capable of making use of itself, for it is capable of
> >> "contemplating
> >> both itself and everything else" By crowning with this reasoning
> faculty
> >> all
> >> that is already given to us by nature, Zeus gave us the possibility and
> >> the
> >> duty to take care of ourselves. It is insofar as he is free and
> >> reasonable
> >> that man is the natural being that has been committed to the care of
> >> himself' (1986, p.47).
> >>
> >> I can't comment on the accuracy of your suggestions but it seems to me
> >> that
> >> the above might be relevant to your questions. All the best.
> >>
> >> Edwin
> >>
> >>
> >> 2008/5/13 Teresa Mayne <teresa.mayne@xxxxxxxxx>:
> >>
> >>> Hi Erik,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for being so direct. I'm probably not explaining myself
> >>> properly,
> >>> I have the habit of thinking in questions, so I will try to be more
> >> clear.
> >>>
> >>> I know the difference between fifth century B.C. Greece and the period
> >> of
> >>> the Enlightenment. What I'm referring to specifically is Foucault's
> >> text
> >>> "What is Enlightenment?". He describes Kant's opinion of the
> >>> Enlightenment
> >>> as an 'exit' from the status of 'immaturity'. The 'maturity' that is
> >>> referred to is "a modification of the preexisting relation linking
> >>> will,
> >>> authority, and the use of reason". In "The Hermeneutics of the
> >>> Subject"
> >>> Foucault outlines three characteristics of the 'care of the self', the
> >>> 'epimeleia heautou'. Firstly, "the epimeleia heautou is an attitude
> >>> towards
> >>> the self, others, and the world". Would it be accurate to link this,
> >>> in
> >>> the
> >>> history of thought, with "a modification of the preexisting relation
> >> [of]
> >>> authority"? Secondly, "being concerned about oneself implies that we
> >> look
> >>> away from the outside to [one-self]". Would it be accurate to link
> the
> >>> emergence of the 'care of the self' with a "modification of the
> >>> preexisting
> >>> relation [of] will"? Thirdly, "the epimeleia also always designates a
> >>> number of actions exercised on the self by the self, actions by which
> >> one
> >>> takes responsibility for oneself and by which one changes, purifies,
> >>> transforms, and transfigures oneself". Would it be accurate to link
> >> this
> >>> with reason (an intellectual action that is "exercised on the self by
> >> the
> >>> self")? Therefore in the history of thought are there correlations
> >>> between
> >>> the viewpoint of the epimeleia heautou and Foucault's interpretation
> of
> >>> how
> >>> Kant views the 'maturity' of the Enlightenment? I hope this clarifies
> >> my
> >>> question.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Teresa
> >>>
> >>> On 5/12/08, Erik Hoogcarspel <jehms@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Teresa for giving me the opportunity to read the text again.
> >>>> Teresa Mayne schreef:
> >>>>> Foucault in *The Hermeneutics of the Subject,* the translations of
> >> his
> >>>>> lectures from the College de France between 1981 – 1982, states that
> >>> "in
> >>>> his
> >>>>> activity of encouraging others to attend to themselves Socrates says
> >>>> that
> >>>>> with regard to his fellow citizens his role is that of someone who
> >>>> awakens
> >>>>> them. The care of the self will thus be looked upon as the moment
> >> of
> >>>> the
> >>>>> first awakening".
> >>>> The text says 'Socrate est celui qui veille à ce que les concitoyens
> >> 'se
> >>>> soicient d'euxmêmes'. I would translate this as 'Socrates is the one
> >> who
> >>>> sees to it that his fellow citizens take care of themselves'. I don't
> >>>> know which translation you use, but it seems that reading it is a
> >>>> complete waste of time. Perhaps you should think of better things to
> >> do
> >>>> with it like lighting a barbeque or putting a plant on it.
> >>>>> Does this awakening correspond in any way to the
> >>>>> awakening of the Enlightenment, which Kant interprets as a way that
> >> we
> >>>> can
> >>>>> free ourselves from the status of immaturity? What I mean is, is
> >>>> Foucault's
> >>>>> interpretation of Kant another way of formulating how the 'care of
> >> the
> >>>> self'
> >>>>> can be awakened yet again? And then is the 'first awakening' a
> >>>> constant,
> >>>>> unchanging awakening that is reborn again and again at various times
> >>>> during
> >>>>> history? I'm thinking of Parmenides here.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Foucault goes on to describe the kinds of personal training or
> askesis
> >>>> in antiquity. He stresses that for all but Plato taking care of
> >> oneself
> >>>> was a constant necessity if one would want to have an accomplished
> >> life.
> >>>> This has nothing to do with the period called enlightenment, which is
> >>>> supposed to be the period when the confidence in the Bible was
> >> replaced
> >>>> with confidence in the light of reason.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Erik
> >>>>
> >>>> Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejehms> <
> >> http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejehms>
> >>>> Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950
> >>>> Productie: http://stores.lulu.com/jehmsstudio
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Foucault-L mailing list
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list