A small but important addendum. In his Introduction to Binswangers essay, Foucault has the phrase 'ontological conditions of existence' (and not 'existential conditions of existence').
"[O]ne cannot define the imaginary as the inverse function, the negative index, of reality. No doubt it develops readily on the ground of absence... . Yet it is also through the imaginary that the original meaning of reality is disclosed. Therefore, it cannot exclude reality. At the very heart of perception it can throw into bright light the secret and hidden power at work in the most manifest forms of presence."
Foucault, Introduction to the French translation of Binswanger's 'Dream and Existence', 1954.
--- On Wed, 24/2/10, michael bibby <shmickeyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: michael bibby <shmickeyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Maladie mentale et personnalité
> To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Received: Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 8:20 PM
> Perhaps a clue to resolving this
> difficulty can be found in the language used in Mental
> Illness and Psychology, which employs expressions like
> 'forms of appearance' and 'conditions of possibility'. We
> find a similiar vocabuary used in his Introductin to the
> French translation of Binswanger's Dream and Existence.
> There, we meet with the expressions 'antropological forms'
> and 'existential conditions of existence.' So, besides the
> evolution of language, what this usage indicates is the
> continuity of a theme...
>
>
>
> "In the characterization of medieval ontology, 'being' is a
> 'transcendens.'"
>
> "The meaning of the being of.. Dasein will be shown to be
> temporality."
>
> "That being towards which Dasein can- and always somehow
> does- comport itself in one way or another, we call
> 'eksistence [Existenz]'."
>
> "Every investigation in this field, where 'the thing itself
> is deeply veiled,' will avoid overestimating its results,
> insofar as such an inquirey is constantly forced to face the
> possibility of disclosing an even more orginal, more
> universal horizon whence one might draw the answer to the
> question, What does 'being' mean?"
>
> Heidegger, Being and Time, 1927.
>
> "We want neither to deny nor to renounce, nor to destroy
> nor to go back... . The wish to return back cannot mean
> anything else for us but one thing: to resume contact with
> life and with what is 'natural' and primitive in it, return
> to the first source from which springs not only science but
> also all the other manifestations of spiritual life, to
> study again the essential relationships which can be found
> originally, before science has modeled it after its fashion,
> between the different phenomena of which life is composed,
> to see whether we cannot extract from them something other
> than science does. [...] We want to look 'without
> instruments,' and say what we see. Contrary to appearances,
> this is, incidentally, a pretty difficult assignment."
>
> Minkowski, Lived Time, 1933.
>
> "One must... grant an absolute privilege, among all the
> signifying dimensions of existence, to that of ascent and
> fall, where alone can be discerned the temporality, the
> authenticity, and the historicity of existence. If one
> remains at the level of the other existential directions,
> one can never grasp existence in any but its constituted
> forms. One could identify situations, define structures and
> modes of being, one could explore the modalities of
> Menschsein: but one must turn to the vertical dimension to
> grasp existence making itself, turn to the vertical
> dimension in that form of absolutely original presence in
> which Dasein is defined."
>
> Foucault, Introduction to the french translation of
> Binswanger's Dream and Existence, 1954.
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\___/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> --- On Wed, 24/2/10, Thomas Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > From: Thomas Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Maladie mentale et
> personnalité
> > To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Received: Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 6:15 AM
> > Qualifier: I can't help you with the
> > French original
> > (not qualified). I think that I can help
> > with how
> > you are reading it based on the English translation
> > you have.
> >
> > On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 00:27 -0800, Kevin Turner
> wrote:
> >
> > > Which I have translated as follows:
> > >
> > > But here we have perhaps touched upon one of the
> > > paradoxes of mental illness that demands new
> forms
> > > of analysis: if the subjectivity of the insane
> is,
> > > at the same time, a call to and an abandonment
> of
> > > the world, is it not of the world itself that we
> > > should ask the secret of this enigmatic
> subjectivity?
> > > After having explored the external dimensions,
> are we
> > > not necessarily led to consider its exterior and
>
> > > objective conditions?
> >
> > (Independently of your analysis, that makes sense
> > to me and seems in keeping with Foucault's larger
> > view of things. I can believe (not prove) it is a
> > reasonable translation. There are easier ways to
> > say the same thing in plainer English that stray
> farther
> > from his French original, though.)
> >
> >
> > > Now my question concerns the first
> external/exterior
> > > (extérieures) in the last sentence.
> > > I have read a number of texts that have
> suggested
> > that
> > > this is actually a misprint and should read
> > internal/interior
> > > (intérieures) (e.g. Bernauer, J. W., Michel
> > Foucault’s Force
> > > of Flight, London, 1990: 187). I have also
> read
> > a number of
> > > texts which have simply rendered this as
> internal
> > without
> > > explanation.
> >
> > I don't think it is likely to be a misprint. I can
> > see the
> > confusion in judging it to be so. Here in
> > plainer
> > English:
> >
> > "After we have characterized the externally
> visible
> >
> > manifestations of mental illness, ought
> > we not next
> > consider the external and objective
> > conditions
> > in which these manifestations occur?"
> >
> > In other words, having come up with ways to measure
> > the behavior or presentation of one who is mentally
> > ill, ought we not ask next what conditions
> surrounding
> > the mentally ill allow or preclude, produce or
> suppress
> > those manifestations?
> >
> > For example, a kid in today's classrooms may be
> judged
> > mentally ill for frequently speaking out in class.
> > So we have a dimension for measuring an external
> feature
> > of mental illness: the ability to speak only in turn
> in
> > class. We *might* turn next to an inferred
> > subjectivity
> > in the child - perhaps he is acting out a trauma.
> > Or we might look for pharmaceutical tricks to
> suppress
> > the unwanted behavior (and thus "cure" the illness).
> >
> > Alternatively, per Foucault, perhaps we should look at
> the
> > external
> > conditions of this behavior such as the system of
> > surveillance
> > and punishment which elevates "silence in class" to
> > a condition of mental health.
> >
> > > So, my question is, is this a misprint or not?
> >
> > Doubt it.
> >
> > > What Foucault discusses in this chapter is the
> twin
> > > tasks of a phenomenology of mental illness:
> noetic –
> > noematic
> > > (Mmp: 55-56). The first of these tasks aims to
> > describe the
> > > experience that the ill person has of their
> illness;
> >
> > An inferred subjective model like: the child is
> speaking
> > out because he is processing some past trauma; or,
> > the child is speaking out because a chemical
> disturbance
> > makes it impossible for him to concentrate.
> >
> > Foucault is specifically speaking against such
> inference
> > (see below).
> >
> > > the second attempts to analyse the existential
> > structured
> > > of the experienced pathological world: Umwelt,
> > Mitwelt, Eigenwelt
> > > (61-64, 64-65, 65-67 respectively).
> >
> > The surrounding and objective world which
> conditionalizes
> > (allows or precludes, produces or suppresses) the
> > behavior.
> >
> > I think that Foucault would tend to evade any demand
> > that he give a detailed existential theory in the
> abstract
> > before trying to talk about what objectively exists
> in
> > the world. He would concentrate more on
> > pretty uncontroversial
> > things like "The teacher is monitoring the
> student,"
> > "the
> > teacher demands silence at certain times," "grades
> are
> > impacted
> > by behavior," "access to the classroom is impacted
> by
> > behavior,"
> > "it is commonly accepted that forgoing access to the
> > classroom
> > voluntarily is irrational and harmful to self,"
> > "irrationality
> > with threat of harm to self or others is treated by
> > various
> > authorities as symptoms of mental illness sufficient
> to
> > invoke
> > the exercise of power to impose treatment," etc.
> >
> > You don't need any complicated existential theory to
> say
> > those things.
> >
> > You can also then draw historical comparisons and
> similar
> > comparisons. "It wasn't always this way," "here
> > are other
> > views of teacher authority that worked," "we can
> ask
> > how and
> > why these arrangements change".
> >
> >
> > This is where I think you probably go wrong, in this
> > bit of your analysis:
> >
> > > Could not the first external in the last
> sentence
> > cited
> > > above be referring to this noematic analysis?
> Since
> > what it
> > > addresses are the contradictions between the
> > experienced
> > > pathological world and the real world. And so
> this
> > last
> > > sentence could read:
> > >
> > > “After having explored the external dimensions
> > > [the pathological world], are we not necessarily
> > > led to consider its exterior and objective
> > > conditions [the real world]?”
> >
> >
> > That is where I think you probably go wrong.
> >
> > If by "[the pathological world]" you mean some
> account
> > of the subjective interior experience of the mentally
> > ill, then I sincerely doubt that that is what he
> means.
> >
> > The clue that that is *not* what he means is in the
> > satirical phrase "this enigmatic subjectivity".
> >
> > He takes no position on the existence or
> non-existence
> > of that subjectivity. Rather, he dismisses the
> > notion
> > that we have by any means gotten at it any further
> than
> > hypothesizing its existence. People talk
> > about it as if
> > they knew something but don't convincingly get
> anywhere.
> > Hence, "enigmatic". He has a history of
> > conflicting
> > accounts of that hypothesis of subjectivity to back
> him
> > up.
> >
> > Paraphrasing in plain English again:
> >
> > "We're given this poorly supported hypothesis of
> > a specially mentally-ill subjectivity. Well, look,
> > we've examined the behavior of the mentally-ill and
> > characterized its dimensions. We could assume the
> > hypothesis about a special kind of subjectivity but
> > wouldn't be better off by turning next to the
> external
> > conditions that allow or preclude, compel or forbid
> > that behavior?"
> >
> > If anything, he is saying "Aren't we wasting time
> > with noematic hypotheses? All we have is the
> surface
> > manifestations (external dimensions) and the chance
> > to do something we've neglected: look at the power
> > and discourse surroundings of those manifestations.
> > Let's stick to the facts rather than assuming too
> much
> > about 'what's in someone's head'"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > I may be totally wrong about this,
> > > which is why I wanted to see what others
> > > had to say before I proceed any further.
> >
> > I hope my take on it is helpful.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -t
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Kevin.
> > >
> > >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________
> > > Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages
> > > Easily monitor multiple email accounts &
> access
> > them with a click.
> > > Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check
> > it out!
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Foucault-L mailing list
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________________
> Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows
> easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7.
> www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
__________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7
"[O]ne cannot define the imaginary as the inverse function, the negative index, of reality. No doubt it develops readily on the ground of absence... . Yet it is also through the imaginary that the original meaning of reality is disclosed. Therefore, it cannot exclude reality. At the very heart of perception it can throw into bright light the secret and hidden power at work in the most manifest forms of presence."
Foucault, Introduction to the French translation of Binswanger's 'Dream and Existence', 1954.
--- On Wed, 24/2/10, michael bibby <shmickeyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: michael bibby <shmickeyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Maladie mentale et personnalité
> To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Received: Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 8:20 PM
> Perhaps a clue to resolving this
> difficulty can be found in the language used in Mental
> Illness and Psychology, which employs expressions like
> 'forms of appearance' and 'conditions of possibility'. We
> find a similiar vocabuary used in his Introductin to the
> French translation of Binswanger's Dream and Existence.
> There, we meet with the expressions 'antropological forms'
> and 'existential conditions of existence.' So, besides the
> evolution of language, what this usage indicates is the
> continuity of a theme...
>
>
>
> "In the characterization of medieval ontology, 'being' is a
> 'transcendens.'"
>
> "The meaning of the being of.. Dasein will be shown to be
> temporality."
>
> "That being towards which Dasein can- and always somehow
> does- comport itself in one way or another, we call
> 'eksistence [Existenz]'."
>
> "Every investigation in this field, where 'the thing itself
> is deeply veiled,' will avoid overestimating its results,
> insofar as such an inquirey is constantly forced to face the
> possibility of disclosing an even more orginal, more
> universal horizon whence one might draw the answer to the
> question, What does 'being' mean?"
>
> Heidegger, Being and Time, 1927.
>
> "We want neither to deny nor to renounce, nor to destroy
> nor to go back... . The wish to return back cannot mean
> anything else for us but one thing: to resume contact with
> life and with what is 'natural' and primitive in it, return
> to the first source from which springs not only science but
> also all the other manifestations of spiritual life, to
> study again the essential relationships which can be found
> originally, before science has modeled it after its fashion,
> between the different phenomena of which life is composed,
> to see whether we cannot extract from them something other
> than science does. [...] We want to look 'without
> instruments,' and say what we see. Contrary to appearances,
> this is, incidentally, a pretty difficult assignment."
>
> Minkowski, Lived Time, 1933.
>
> "One must... grant an absolute privilege, among all the
> signifying dimensions of existence, to that of ascent and
> fall, where alone can be discerned the temporality, the
> authenticity, and the historicity of existence. If one
> remains at the level of the other existential directions,
> one can never grasp existence in any but its constituted
> forms. One could identify situations, define structures and
> modes of being, one could explore the modalities of
> Menschsein: but one must turn to the vertical dimension to
> grasp existence making itself, turn to the vertical
> dimension in that form of absolutely original presence in
> which Dasein is defined."
>
> Foucault, Introduction to the french translation of
> Binswanger's Dream and Existence, 1954.
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\___/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> --- On Wed, 24/2/10, Thomas Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > From: Thomas Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Maladie mentale et
> personnalité
> > To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Received: Wednesday, 24 February, 2010, 6:15 AM
> > Qualifier: I can't help you with the
> > French original
> > (not qualified). I think that I can help
> > with how
> > you are reading it based on the English translation
> > you have.
> >
> > On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 00:27 -0800, Kevin Turner
> wrote:
> >
> > > Which I have translated as follows:
> > >
> > > But here we have perhaps touched upon one of the
> > > paradoxes of mental illness that demands new
> forms
> > > of analysis: if the subjectivity of the insane
> is,
> > > at the same time, a call to and an abandonment
> of
> > > the world, is it not of the world itself that we
> > > should ask the secret of this enigmatic
> subjectivity?
> > > After having explored the external dimensions,
> are we
> > > not necessarily led to consider its exterior and
>
> > > objective conditions?
> >
> > (Independently of your analysis, that makes sense
> > to me and seems in keeping with Foucault's larger
> > view of things. I can believe (not prove) it is a
> > reasonable translation. There are easier ways to
> > say the same thing in plainer English that stray
> farther
> > from his French original, though.)
> >
> >
> > > Now my question concerns the first
> external/exterior
> > > (extérieures) in the last sentence.
> > > I have read a number of texts that have
> suggested
> > that
> > > this is actually a misprint and should read
> > internal/interior
> > > (intérieures) (e.g. Bernauer, J. W., Michel
> > Foucault’s Force
> > > of Flight, London, 1990: 187). I have also
> read
> > a number of
> > > texts which have simply rendered this as
> internal
> > without
> > > explanation.
> >
> > I don't think it is likely to be a misprint. I can
> > see the
> > confusion in judging it to be so. Here in
> > plainer
> > English:
> >
> > "After we have characterized the externally
> visible
> >
> > manifestations of mental illness, ought
> > we not next
> > consider the external and objective
> > conditions
> > in which these manifestations occur?"
> >
> > In other words, having come up with ways to measure
> > the behavior or presentation of one who is mentally
> > ill, ought we not ask next what conditions
> surrounding
> > the mentally ill allow or preclude, produce or
> suppress
> > those manifestations?
> >
> > For example, a kid in today's classrooms may be
> judged
> > mentally ill for frequently speaking out in class.
> > So we have a dimension for measuring an external
> feature
> > of mental illness: the ability to speak only in turn
> in
> > class. We *might* turn next to an inferred
> > subjectivity
> > in the child - perhaps he is acting out a trauma.
> > Or we might look for pharmaceutical tricks to
> suppress
> > the unwanted behavior (and thus "cure" the illness).
> >
> > Alternatively, per Foucault, perhaps we should look at
> the
> > external
> > conditions of this behavior such as the system of
> > surveillance
> > and punishment which elevates "silence in class" to
> > a condition of mental health.
> >
> > > So, my question is, is this a misprint or not?
> >
> > Doubt it.
> >
> > > What Foucault discusses in this chapter is the
> twin
> > > tasks of a phenomenology of mental illness:
> noetic –
> > noematic
> > > (Mmp: 55-56). The first of these tasks aims to
> > describe the
> > > experience that the ill person has of their
> illness;
> >
> > An inferred subjective model like: the child is
> speaking
> > out because he is processing some past trauma; or,
> > the child is speaking out because a chemical
> disturbance
> > makes it impossible for him to concentrate.
> >
> > Foucault is specifically speaking against such
> inference
> > (see below).
> >
> > > the second attempts to analyse the existential
> > structured
> > > of the experienced pathological world: Umwelt,
> > Mitwelt, Eigenwelt
> > > (61-64, 64-65, 65-67 respectively).
> >
> > The surrounding and objective world which
> conditionalizes
> > (allows or precludes, produces or suppresses) the
> > behavior.
> >
> > I think that Foucault would tend to evade any demand
> > that he give a detailed existential theory in the
> abstract
> > before trying to talk about what objectively exists
> in
> > the world. He would concentrate more on
> > pretty uncontroversial
> > things like "The teacher is monitoring the
> student,"
> > "the
> > teacher demands silence at certain times," "grades
> are
> > impacted
> > by behavior," "access to the classroom is impacted
> by
> > behavior,"
> > "it is commonly accepted that forgoing access to the
> > classroom
> > voluntarily is irrational and harmful to self,"
> > "irrationality
> > with threat of harm to self or others is treated by
> > various
> > authorities as symptoms of mental illness sufficient
> to
> > invoke
> > the exercise of power to impose treatment," etc.
> >
> > You don't need any complicated existential theory to
> say
> > those things.
> >
> > You can also then draw historical comparisons and
> similar
> > comparisons. "It wasn't always this way," "here
> > are other
> > views of teacher authority that worked," "we can
> ask
> > how and
> > why these arrangements change".
> >
> >
> > This is where I think you probably go wrong, in this
> > bit of your analysis:
> >
> > > Could not the first external in the last
> sentence
> > cited
> > > above be referring to this noematic analysis?
> Since
> > what it
> > > addresses are the contradictions between the
> > experienced
> > > pathological world and the real world. And so
> this
> > last
> > > sentence could read:
> > >
> > > “After having explored the external dimensions
> > > [the pathological world], are we not necessarily
> > > led to consider its exterior and objective
> > > conditions [the real world]?”
> >
> >
> > That is where I think you probably go wrong.
> >
> > If by "[the pathological world]" you mean some
> account
> > of the subjective interior experience of the mentally
> > ill, then I sincerely doubt that that is what he
> means.
> >
> > The clue that that is *not* what he means is in the
> > satirical phrase "this enigmatic subjectivity".
> >
> > He takes no position on the existence or
> non-existence
> > of that subjectivity. Rather, he dismisses the
> > notion
> > that we have by any means gotten at it any further
> than
> > hypothesizing its existence. People talk
> > about it as if
> > they knew something but don't convincingly get
> anywhere.
> > Hence, "enigmatic". He has a history of
> > conflicting
> > accounts of that hypothesis of subjectivity to back
> him
> > up.
> >
> > Paraphrasing in plain English again:
> >
> > "We're given this poorly supported hypothesis of
> > a specially mentally-ill subjectivity. Well, look,
> > we've examined the behavior of the mentally-ill and
> > characterized its dimensions. We could assume the
> > hypothesis about a special kind of subjectivity but
> > wouldn't be better off by turning next to the
> external
> > conditions that allow or preclude, compel or forbid
> > that behavior?"
> >
> > If anything, he is saying "Aren't we wasting time
> > with noematic hypotheses? All we have is the
> surface
> > manifestations (external dimensions) and the chance
> > to do something we've neglected: look at the power
> > and discourse surroundings of those manifestations.
> > Let's stick to the facts rather than assuming too
> much
> > about 'what's in someone's head'"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > I may be totally wrong about this,
> > > which is why I wanted to see what others
> > > had to say before I proceed any further.
> >
> > I hope my take on it is helpful.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -t
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Kevin.
> > >
> > >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________
> > > Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages
> > > Easily monitor multiple email accounts &
> access
> > them with a click.
> > > Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check
> > it out!
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Foucault-L mailing list
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________________
> Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows
> easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7.
> www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
__________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7