The archaeology of knowledge

These theoretical problems too will be examined only in a particular field: A discursive object such as madness is shaped by measures of discrimination, repression, law, religion, medical diagnosis, medical codes and practices.

For example, if one is in the field of presence of Natural History in the 17th century, a field of concomitance would be cosmology, philosophy, theology, etc. Taking those group figures which, in an insistent but confused way, presented themselves as psychology, economics, grammar, medicine, we asked on what kind of unity they could be based: I never even made it out of the introduction before I reshelved this ugly fucker!

But what relations exist between them? What has emerged is a unity of another type, which does not appear to have the same dates, or the same surface, or the same articulations, but which may take account of a group of objects for which the term psychopathology was merely a reflexive, secondary, classificatory rubric.

Modalities of enunciation are described on the basis of the position occupied by the subject in relation to the domain of objects of which he is speaking.

There is an authority that designs the rules and processes of appropriation of discourse. These strategies are not independent of discourse, but are what make discourse possible.

The Archæology of Knowledge

But it is only a provisional privilege. But what are these unities? On the other hand, it was no doubt at this period that new surfaces of appearance began to function: And for two reasons.

Rather than seeking the permanence of themes, images, and opinions through time, rather than retracing the dialectic of their conflicts in order to individualise groups of statements, could one not rather mark out the dispersion of the points of choice, and define prior to any option, to any thematic preference, a field of strategic possibilities?

Sites are the hospital, the laboratory, but also the library or university where the doctor trains and acquires the right to speak a medical discourse.

As I see it, two series of problems arise at the outset: Here we see accepted discourses Grammar, Economics reaching into fields of non-discursive practices. The rules of formation are conditions of existence but also of coexistence, maintenance, modification, and disappearance in a given discursive division.

Would not the typical relation that would enable us to individualise a group of statements concerning madness then be: The sagacity of the commentators is not mistaken: The transcendent subject disappears in archaeology, and discourse becomes a stubborn exteriority neutral to thoughts, wishes or desires of a speaker, indifferent to distinctions between the life or death of an author.

The first involves a wish that it should never be possible to assign, in the order of discourse, the irruption of a real event; that beyond any apparent beginning, there is always a secret origin - so secret and so fundamental that it can never be quite grasped in itself.

Did I ever mention that when I was young, my vocational ambition was to be one of the people who dressed up like characters at Disney World?

Because those covers, while not boner-inducing, were more appealing than this one.

The Archaeology of Knowledge & The Discourse on Language

Maybe if I do two pages a day on the crapper. A single theme, but based on two types of discourse. Foucault argues that "discourses" emerge and transform not according to a developing series of unarticulated, common worldviews, but according to a vast and complex set of discursive and institutional relationships, which are defined as much by breaks and ruptures as by unified themes.

Michel Foucault – The Archaeology of Knowledge – part I-II

Discourse must not be referred to the distant presence of the origin, but treated as and when it occurs.

Archaeology does not treat discourse as a document but rather as a monument. We do not seek below what is manifest the half silent murmur of another discourse; we must show why it could not be other than it was, in what respect it is exclusive of any other, how it assumes, in the midst of others and in relation to them, a place that no other could occupy.

It seemed to me, for example, that from the nineteenth century medical science was characterised not so much by its objects or concepts as by a certain style, a certain constant manner of statement.

I am presented therefore with four attempts, four failures - and four successive hypotheses. It is also clear that this description of discourses is in opposition to the history of thought. For the first time, medicine no longer consisted of a group of traditions, observations, and heterogeneous practices, but of a corpus of knowledge that presupposed the same way of looking at things, the same division of the perceptual field, the same analysis of the pathological fact in accordance with the visible space of the body, the same system of transcribing what one perceived in what one said same vocabulary, same play of metaphor ; in short, it seemed to me that medicine was organised as a series of descriptive statements.

The relation between planes of specification like penal categories and degrees of diminished responsibility, and planes of psychological characterisation faculties, aptitudes, degrees of development or involution, different ways of reacting to the environment, character types, whether acquired, innate, or hereditary.

Could one not, for example, constitute as a unity everything that has constituted the evolutionist theme from Buffon to Darwin?The archaeology of knowledge.

[Michel Foucault; Alan Sheridan] -- In France, a country that awards its intellectuals the status other countries give their rock stars, Michel Foucault was part of a glittering generation of thinkers, one which also included Sartre. The Archaeology of Knowledge Questions and Answers.

The Question and Answer section for The Archaeology of Knowledge is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel. The Archaeology of Knowledge (French: L'archéologie du savoir) is a methodological and historiographical treatise by the French philosopher Michel Foucault, in which he promotes "archaeology" or the "archaeological method".

Foucault’s book The Archaeology of Knowledge is about the conditions, rules and systems of dispersion of discourse. Ultimately, this book is an analysis of the relation between the formation of knowledge and power.

The Archaeology of Knowledge begins at the level of “things a. Madness, sexuality, power, knowledge—are these facts of life or simply parts of speech? In a series of works of astonishing brilliance, historian Michel Foucault excavated the hidden assumptions that govern the way we live and the way we think/5.


The archaeology of knowledge
Rated 5/5 based on 57 review