Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

Today I'm posting another solid lecture by Rick Roderick this time on Michel Foucault. 

Today 'experts' are often used to push a dominant narrative, for example, neoliberal assumptions are often touted as the rational and scientific understanding of the world. As we can see, these perspectives are often based on benefiting certain interests than a larger 'rational' project. Consider the sniveling idiot Ben Shapiro's line 'facts don't care about your feelings,' or Sam Harris' peddling of racist pseudo-science. In both of these cases, their contrived fidelity to facts and rationalism is an attempt to obscure their racism and bigotry. A claim to knowledge (i.e. a claim of authority) is not necessarily an objective claim. Foucault expands this premise much further questioning rationalism itself and his interrogating work destabilizes our understanding of knowledge and logic.    

-  David Griscom 

Files

Previews only

Rick Roderick on Foucault - The Disappearance of the Human [full length]

This video is 6th in the 8-part video lecture series, The Self Under Siege: Philosophy in the Twentieth Century (1993). Lecture notes: I. Foucault is a strong anti-humanist who believes that "man" is a relatively recent construction of a particular historical paradigm. Such paradigms structure discourse and action, as well as institutions and belief systems. They are, at the same time, systems of knowledge that are always interconnected with systems of power. Anywhere you find knowledge, there too you find a regime of power. II. Knowledge is comprised of discourses that function through rules of exclusion. These determine who may speak, about what, for how long, and in what setting or contexts. III. Foucault's "Discipline and Punish" shows how the paradigm of punishment and the law shift from one period to another. In the feudal period, we have "the body of the condemned" as a singular figure and "the spectacle of the scaffold" which expresses the criminal as a transgressor and our interest in him. IV. In the modern period, we move to a paradigm of generalized punishment; from the body of the condemned to the entire social body (public works, school and prison reform). The reformers in many areas institute a micro-physics of power over the "docile bodies: of the "trained" and "socialized". V. Foucault's method of writing his "histories" rests on the postulate that there are no bare "facts", just interpretations and these are themselves only made possible by the currently existing regime of power/knowledge. Particular to his method are the following: a. reversal, that the perspective of the standard history and reverse it; b. marginality, takes the focus off what has traditionally been thought to be central and look at the excluded; c. discontinuity, drop the idea of necessary progress and look for breaks and catastrophes; d. materially, look at practices more than at ideologies; and e. specificity, take single instances to illuminate larger points. VI. Foucault wants to reclaim a kind of radical critique in the interest of people rendered inhuman by what he sees as the very discourse of the "human". VII. Foucault can be read as a novelist, a historian, a radical critic of society, and many other things. Most importantly, he has changed our discourse from Marx and the "factory" to Foucault and the "prison". He has carried forward at least a part of the task of freeing a new kind of self from the barbarism of what is still called the past. For more information, see http://www.rickroderick.org A philosophy podcast, The Partially Examined Life, held a detailed discussion of Foucault's Discipline and Punish, which can be found here: http://www.partiallyexaminedlife.com/2012/01/11/episode-49-foucault-on-power-and-punishment/

Comments

Gwen Hennacy

It seems almost like at 15:30 he's speaking to Sam Harris' defense of Charles Murray.

David Russell

Famous old saying never fails. History is written by the victors. People weak minded as Sam Harris will never be able to process cause he can't grasp the complexity that it will ultimately reveal.

Joseph Dunn

I am hardly an expert, but I dont think Foucault's ideas are conducive (in the long run) to socialist praxis or democratic governance in any broad sense. His thoughts are complex, but I think they can also be adopted by the radical right in a manner not too dissimilar to Nietzsche who was a big influence on him.

TMBS

Well, I would agree about Foucault's role within the socialist left. Applied politically Foucault does manifest as well as a Sartre, Badiou, or Althusser, would, just to name some of his contemporaries. His writings on Iran are, to say the least, disappointing. The Nietzsche question is a bit more difficult to work out succinctly, but there is no doubt that Foucault represents a different form of politics. But Foucault's ideas are so influential that we must engage with them, with our critiques in mind. - David G

Ryan Elick

Roderick knocks it out of the park again. The amount of so-called "logical" and "rational" discourse that you see online today without any sort of historical context is astounding.