Re: [Foucault-L] F's intro to K's anthro

Arianna, I have read it, yes. It is rather dense, but I found
Beatrice Han's book (and essays) very helpful. I'm still not sure how
much the problems he identifies there carry his own work. For
example, his conclusion to The Order of Things seems to put his
analysis of Kant to work in a Nietzsche frame, and it seems that
without Kant's anthropology this would not have been possible. Even
though later on he rejects the book, I wonder how much the "place of
man" remains throughout his corpus, if only as an empty space. An
empty space, moreover, than disperses itself and will have nothing to
do with the "last instance" (Althusser).

And Arianna, I will read you essay on F's Introduction, but until
then, is he Kantian simply by virtue of his use of a prioris, or is it
the specific way in which he problematizes the appearance of the
transcendental in the empirical? Is Foucault working out the Kantian
aporia of inner sense, or leaving it behind?


On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Douglas Olena <doug@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> James and Arianna,
> I think Arianna is correct James, Foucault thought of himself as a Kantian. Semiotext(e) published a translation of Foucault's Introduction to Kant's Anthropology in 2008. It is, as far as I know, complete, unlike the online version Arianna pointed you to. You might also be interested in The Politics of Truth, also Semiotext(e), a collection of Foucault's essays edited by Sylvère Lotringer. Some of the Kantian connections, especially the first three essays by Foucault follow Kant's suggestions, critique Kant, and the Enlightenment.
> Best.
> Doug
> -----
> Douglas Olena
> doug@xxxxxxxxx
> -----
> On Nov 6, 2010, at 5:13 AM, ari wrote:
>> Hi James,
>> have you read it? It's been online for many years now.
>> Foucault also makes an explicit connection in the entry he wrote under the
>> pseudonym Maurice Florence to the Dictionnaire des Philosophes on himself,
>> which begins like this: 'To the extent that Foucault fits into the
>> philosophical tradition, it is in the critical tradition of Kant, and his
>> project could be called a critical history of thought' (p. 457 of Michel
>> Foucault Essential volume 2 Aesthetics).
>> My comments on your questions are online, but in short I'd add that crucial
>> to this particular work is not only the ethical and political issue of what
>> man makes of himself, but also a clear stance against transcendentalism in
>> all its forms and for a peculiar epistemological pragmatics.
>> Enjoy it,
>> Arianna
>> On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 23:08:55 -0400, james <spatium@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> In the previous thread there was a tie into F's dissertation (1 of 2)
>>> on Kant's pragmatic anthropology.  If this in fact demonstrates F's
>>> connection to what way?  By pointing out the arrival of man
>>> as doublet, and identifying the role of an "originary" in terms of
>>> something like an empirical a priori, strong connections can be made
>>> with F's early work of his own.  But I wonder, what use does F make of
>>> these notions - is it critical or constructive (that is, is he a
>>> neo-Kantian)?
>>> james
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foucault-L mailing list
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foucault-L mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list

  • Re: [Foucault-L] F's intro to K's anthro
    • From: james
  • Re: [Foucault-L] F's intro to K's anthro
    • From: Chetan Vemuri
  • Replies
    [Foucault-L] F's intro to K's anthro, james
    Re: [Foucault-L] F's intro to K's anthro, ari
    Re: [Foucault-L] F's intro to K's anthro, Douglas Olena
    Partial thread listing: