Hi Dalie,
and thanks for your succinct answer.
The reason I was asking the question is that in the English translation of "Theatrum Philosophicum," the translator highlights a difference between the two terms when Foucault talks about 'the object of thought [le pensé], and thought itself [le pensée]' (EW2: 353). And so it occurred to me that Foucault may have been wanting to make a distinction between an analysis that focuses on the "objects of thought," and the kind of analysis that he does/did that focuses on thought itself and its history.
You answer obviously make this observation redundant.
Thanks once again,
Kevin.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dgiroux@xxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:08:08 -0500
> To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Foucault-L] RE : thought
>
> "pensé" is past participle (=thought)
> "pensée" is a noun (=THE thinking, if it makes any sense)
>
> it is usual in french to use the noun ("pensée") to mean "thought" -
> "histoire du pensé" would just be strange and is never used otherwise
> than as a past participle.
>
>
> Dalie Giroux
> École d'études politiques/Université d'Ottawa
> Ottawa (ON) K1N 6N5
> (613)562-5800 poste 1715
>
> www.cahiers-idiotie.org
> onoups.blogspot.com
>
>
>
> -------- Message d'origine--------
> De: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx de la part de Kevin Turner
> Date: ven. 2009-02-27 07:36
> À: Foucault List
> Objet : [Foucault-L] thought
>
> is there any significance to be attached to the fact that Foucault called
> his chair at the Collège de France "Histoire des systèmes de pensée" and
> not "pensé"
>
> i.e. what is the significance of the difference between "pensé" and
> "pensée"
>
> regards,
> kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
and thanks for your succinct answer.
The reason I was asking the question is that in the English translation of "Theatrum Philosophicum," the translator highlights a difference between the two terms when Foucault talks about 'the object of thought [le pensé], and thought itself [le pensée]' (EW2: 353). And so it occurred to me that Foucault may have been wanting to make a distinction between an analysis that focuses on the "objects of thought," and the kind of analysis that he does/did that focuses on thought itself and its history.
You answer obviously make this observation redundant.
Thanks once again,
Kevin.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dgiroux@xxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:08:08 -0500
> To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Foucault-L] RE : thought
>
> "pensé" is past participle (=thought)
> "pensée" is a noun (=THE thinking, if it makes any sense)
>
> it is usual in french to use the noun ("pensée") to mean "thought" -
> "histoire du pensé" would just be strange and is never used otherwise
> than as a past participle.
>
>
> Dalie Giroux
> École d'études politiques/Université d'Ottawa
> Ottawa (ON) K1N 6N5
> (613)562-5800 poste 1715
>
> www.cahiers-idiotie.org
> onoups.blogspot.com
>
>
>
> -------- Message d'origine--------
> De: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx de la part de Kevin Turner
> Date: ven. 2009-02-27 07:36
> À: Foucault List
> Objet : [Foucault-L] thought
>
> is there any significance to be attached to the fact that Foucault called
> his chair at the Collège de France "Histoire des systèmes de pensée" and
> not "pensé"
>
> i.e. what is the significance of the difference between "pensé" and
> "pensée"
>
> regards,
> kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list