EBOOK FREE (Les mots et les chosesUne archéologie des sciences humaines) Ù Michel Foucault

Tomboyland
.
Les mots et es chosesUne archéologie des sciences humainesOne of those books that I keep coming back to again and again The Order of Things the French title Words and Things is probably precise is one of those key books that re orders the way you think It begins with a classic and bravura passage an analysis of Velasuez s Las Meninas that should be reuired reading for anyone interested in exegesis or hermeneutics The book goes on to discuss how we categorise and valorise knowledge how we choose to draw the boundaries of the objects in the world how we prioritise kinds of knowledge Not an easy read but a powerful one A key work highly recommended I m finished in the sense that I know I m not going to pick it up and continue again any time soon I made it to page 273 but I have found it a bit too boring and difficult to find the discipline to continueWhat Foucault has to say is fairly interesting but after getting the gist of the idea from the introduction and to be honest a synopsis of the contents I don t think there s much to be gained from actually reading the book I understand the idea of paradigm shift s in our body of knowledge and I believe they happen and that culture affects everything including supposedly objective practices such as science However Foucault s attempt to demonstrate this is narrow unconvicing full of unuestioned assumptions that what has taken place in Western Europe can be said to demonstrate universal principles and written in an extremely boring fashion which I wasn t expecting Nietsche railed against German thinkers for writing such a dull heavy ugly prose and envied the French for their ight witty writing tradition Unfortunately the French seem to have bought into the idea of Germanic profundity in their writing style these days I don t really know what to make of Michel Foucault s The Order of Things Some things appear to be true in it and other things new The things that are true aren t new and the things that are new aren t true Foucault argues that there was a turning point in understanding and inuiry which occurred during the 18th century perhaps near the tail end All fine so far and that is surely one way to divide up intellectual history Foucault is right that the Age of Enlightenment brought about new ways of thinking about human beings and the world but the rest I don t claim to understandFoucault has this complicated idea that anguage s role in knowledge changed into the 18th century How does he determine this Through philological analysis Mabon Celebrating the Autumn Euinox looking at how the use of certain key terms changed over time That s ateast a main way he goes about the studies But t In this impressive book Foucault takes on the basic organizational episteme of our current epoch He highlights the contemporary modality of our post modern world by tracing the development of our episteme from the 16th century to the present dayWhile this may seem to be a simple tale of historical causation Foucault says explicitly on several occasions that he cannot account for the break between the end of the 19th century and the start of the 20th century What he is referring to has several possible angles to it which strongly emphasizes that in our current era we have not processed this break fully that we are still within this ogic and therefore unable to account for itOne way to speak of this break is to note that in the Classical era knowledge was mediated through a reference to the infinite This had the happy conseuence of making anguage transparent If there was a GG GOGP limit to our knowledge itay in the fact that human beings were finite and unable to extend to the fullest reaches of knowing which would otherwise be available When one contrasts this with the current epoch we have the condition of knowing being mediated by man As Zizek might say a subject hood is self realized selfhood that all conditions of knowing pass through the selfWhile it may be tempting to digress into philosophical contemplation with this idealist twist Foucault is uick to add that this subjectivity is only made possible because the inherent formalization of various fields have fragmented into their own The Curse of Gandhari logic for him biology economics and philology are the ones heooks at but by no means are these positions foundational What I mean by immanent Edyta Sitar for Laundry Basket Quilts Calendar logic is that the formalization which is expressed as the adoptation of mathesis as a neutral symbology by which to express immanentogic forces each of these fields to define the conditions of their knowledge by an appeal to a central agency that is both immanent to the field and conditioned beyond it What ends up happening is that we chase our own shadow Human beings created these fields of knowledge to solve specific tasks relating to how we valuate our situation We want to know certain things and value knowing those things in the way that we do thus these fields come to reflect our basis premises as to who we are and how we are To say this in another way these different fragmented sciences are created from and simultaneously inform the cultural biases which outlines these various fields of study In these areas biology economics anguage and so on ultimately reflect back how we create knowing so that when we attempt to know these fields completely we end up chasing our own reflection Foucault uses the Diego s painting Las Meninas as the metaphor for this knowing The various figures in the field become stabilized in our attempt to see what is going on and in that moment we catch a faint glimpse of our own reflection in the distance For this reason man and subjecthood as Foucault notes are in fact recent authorizations which did not exist previous to this breakYou can find many ideas that he skims here as echoing positions by other thinkers Deleuze Derrida Lyotard Meillasoux Baudrillard they all arrange our situation differently but their arrangement of our situation isn t a Genuine Stepping Out Of stepping out of In much the same way writers ike Kafka and Beckett are only made possible because of the epoch they are already expressing the confusion of the order which refers back to us they are not creating the order nor are they recording its transitionOne of the most telling features that Foucault writes about telling in the sense that this is an Event is how he recasts time as a matter of epistemological entrapment Our inability to decide for ourselves an origin for consciousness is a sign that consciousness exists outside our ability to know because it is the condition of how we know This strongly matches Badious writing on the Event signaling that our criteria for knowing remains invisible to us Consciousness Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: Experiencing Flow in Work and Play like the figure of Man remains theimit to our knowledge because we are the figure by which we can come to know everything else around us Foucault would God's Eye: Awakening: A Labyrinth World LitRPG Novel like to realize the historical causality in the rising of this event but he can t explain it There can be no causality because our methods of understanding will not be able to account for itself In fact I am expressing this episteme right now as the current trace of philosophy and knowledge today sciences included wish to think the unthinking to bring about consciousness to the real conditions of knowing This of course is a problem because if our human parameters for what matters isn t objective enough for us and in fact can only bring about the cultural biases which are expressed in how we decide what is worthy of knowing and how we should know something what terms are relevant then what should be the basis for the creation of a new knowledgeFoucault offers Nietzche s superman as a possible condition of the new The Eternal Return marks a horrifically new epoch for which we can have new conditions The Nazi trauma as it were was not it because it was not enough to mark a difference that false event was too conditioned already by recent and ancient histories its baggage signaled an allegiance to the current epoch in much the same way Mao or Stalinism did the same Of course a new condition also means a new history also means the end of philosophy or the start of a new one but I digress Michel Foucault is doing something with words in this book which is actually trying to make something that should be easy to understand and explain uite complicated to follow as he creates awesome sentences thatast for ages and paragraphs that defy the Cher laws of mathematics and understanding of the way words can be put in order one after the other Our friend Foucault has decided that explaining something in an easy to follow way is for people that don t really care aboutanguage philosophy and the understanding of how the Western world has created itself as the time has advanced with stops on how the people have explained to themselves and others different concepts starting with the depiction of a picture from a Spanish painter which paints himself or maybe he doesn t or maybe he is painting the viewer to the most present obsession with man while touching on economy the description of nature or animals and some nice moments talking about paper money or Nietzsche Some of his ideas get A Harry for her lost in hisove for making extra ong sentences where he can congratulate himself with how smart he is and get the reader ost because it may necessary to stop once or twice to follow what he was saying two pages ago where he started a course of thought that maybe is not as clear as it should be but hey this is an awesome book that plays beautifully with Wenn lieben weh tut Ein Kommunikationsratgeber für Partner in der Borderline Beziehung language and all these things we humans use when trying to understand each other and the world weive in That doesn t mean to say that the reader won t Titan Rising learn anything from this book but probably many will find themselves uiteost in it while many others will be patting their backs as they think that following Foucault s ideas means they are very smart which they may be but this really doesn t matter because whatever they understand of Foucault s ideas depends on constructions on Il nuovo saper vivere di Donna Letizia (Comefare) language and things of the society theyive in and on the power relations and the bio power and all beautiful things we may pass hours talking about again they are actually uite interesting but unnecessary to make them over complicated when the idea behind them would be way easier to follow with a clearer explanation which may or may not be forthcoming but it is possible as ヴァイオレット・エヴァーガーデン 2 Violet Evergarden language words and the construction of sentences depend on the writer or the one that is saying the words making it not as complicated for the reader to follow the sentences that have been written on paper paper being just a way in which symbols explain a thing constructs that we humans try to create to explain the world that surrounds us because withoutanguage which may be something we kind of are born with as an organ helps us to communicate with each other some kind of evolution organ which explains why we මොන්ත ක්‍රිස්තෝ සිටුවරයා 6 learn how to talk with each other or could just be that I m trying to make this sentence extraong which may have to do
WITH THE ORDER OF THESE BRACKETSOH 
the order of these bracketsOh and the way people or men as the books keeps saying have understood things in Europe has changed a Aristotle's Categories and Porphyry lot with the pass of time And we are determined by the constructs or deconstructs all around usYou know the order of thingsOr words and things3510 It is uite possible that there was aot to this book than I got out of it and that Foucault s thinking might have been extremely exciting if only I could have decoded it I am not annoyed at the use of so many L’Écume des jours long and unfamiliar words because sometimesong words do say something that shorter words can t I am not irritated that I had to Ночевала тучка золотая look upots of words nor that I had to struggle with the definitions to try to get my head around unfamiliar ways of thinkingI would expect all that from a post structuralist I did not expect that he would use his words in such an absolute way not defining what he means by words even when he is using them in a slightly off centre way I am not sure whether my criticisms apply to FOUCAULT MICHEL himself or his translatorI did not appreciate how many of the sentences ran on for over ten Exam Ref MD-101 Managing Modern Desktops lines ten dense and adeuately wideines and that one had several colons and semicolons to give the wrong impression of a break ran on for EIGHTEEN LINES of densely written wordy hard to grasp academic show offyness I accept that a smarter person than me might find the words easier but the sentence structure I think would put anyone offWhat it is is a history of thinking and classifying thoughtconcepts So it takes in evolutions in science history Apocalipsis Island linguistics and recently psychology and sociology I appreciate the idea that man did not exist as something to be considered until comparatively recently I had not thought of that but it makes sense once you have read through the whole book I enjoyed the illustration of the painting with the different roles and points of view the argument was still difficult to follow but there was a focus in that and Iiked that the author returned to this to illustrate the newness of the centrality of man though I had some waspish feminist thoughts about gender here and also added my own thoughts about the race and class of this narcissistic god replacing man I didn t enjoy Foucault s androcentric Las Prepago? = Prepaid Girls? language but on the other hand reading critically the whole history of thought and thinking rationality can be then portrayed with Foucault sovely നിരീശ്വരൻ long sentences that take forever to wade through as a male self indulgent wank fest while women were relegated ordinary thingsike conversations and connections and meals and care of the young and old This nasty interpretation of why Foucault talks about man men and he consistently may not be the whole truth but it is not wholly untrue eitherThe guy does not put references in properly except occasionally when he feels The Conquest of Happiness like footnoting probably because being so much greater and smarter than the rest of us he does not need to back up his thinking and we should take what he says on faith At times I wanted to know where a thought supposing I even understood it was coming from In this way I would haveiked him to write pedagogically to write to inform or teach me rather than just to showcase his admittedly great knowledge of ancient texts and ability to name drop a whole heap of important writers that I never heard ofI also got confused that he writes in each age in the present tense so he says we think this and such and such is true in the sixteenth century for example Once I got used to this I sort of enjoyed it but it means he is dangerous to use in a iterature review as you could easily take him right out of context I was disappointed actually considering that anybody who is anybody these days uoted Foucault especially if they are even remotely post structuralist and many critical writers do too The disappointment was that this was not useful for my thesis or even I think for my thinking It was interesting and clever but I am not sure it meaningfully expanded my mind or knowledge maybe because some of it was over my head I must be honestI am not sure who I would recommend this book to apart from people who think they are smarter than everyone else and need the challenge or at east will stop acting superior for a few days while they wrestle with the LENGTHY overwording Sort of. Librarian note an alternate cover for this edition can be found hereWith vast erudition Foucault cuts across disciplines and reaches back into seventeenth century to show how classical systems of knowledge which inked all of nature within a great chain of being and analogies bet. .
Fun I suppose in a masochistic way but if it was condensed to half the Presumed Guilty length I would mean the fun aot sincerely After publishing Madness and Civilization 1961 and The Birth of the Clinic 1963 in which Michel Foucault dug into the historical Damnation Road layers to find out how each historical era is guided by its own substratum In The Order of Things 1966 Foucault does the exact same thing covering the exact same historical time frame roughly 1500 1900 AD but now in a complete and systematic fashionThe gist is the same the period from theate Middle Ages up to the Renaissance had its own grid that it Anal- und Prostatamassage - Kurzanleitung (2017) - Massage-Techniken fr die Tantramassage und mehr Genuss beim Sex: Ideal fr die erotische Massage - ... fr den Mann [DIN A4 - zweiseitig, laminiert] laid over the world and which determined its knowledge ethics social structure etc This grid was broken up around 1600 when a new grid developed which made old ways ofooking at and being in the world break up and opened up a formation of a new substratum on which to build a superstructure of knowledge ethics social institutions etc This period ended around the end of the eighteenth century when a new grid was formed and the whole process begun again We are currently still in this atter historical period although we can already see according to Foucault the first cracks developing hinting at the breakdown of our current time This is basically the underlying theme of The Order of Things It is important to keep this in underlying theme in mind when reading this book since Foucault never explicitly works this out What he does is explain first what the episteme of a historical era was and then proceed to flesh the implications of this particular episteme for mostly matters of knowledge were He does this three times for the three historical phases mentioned above It is important to stress that Foucault is not attempting to offer a historical sketch of how thought developed over time he explicitly rejects the approach of historians of science What he does is analyze the manifestations as scientific theory of the underlying episteme within a defined historical period In doing so he is able to sketch how an a priori structure eads to human thought behavior and feeling that is contained within that historical period How one episteme follows upon another in other words how history proceeds if causality and chronology are both rejected is unclear to me Or rather after finishing the book it is rather unclear to me what the mechanism is that ends one episteme and builds another Foucault s analyses of particular sciences and theories of knowledge WBCS General Studies - A Complete Manual leave this important uestion unanswered ateast as far as I can tell please correct me if I m wrongWithout going into all the intricate detail of each historical period at the end of this review I l explain why this is the general overview of the bookIn the Renaissance the episteme was founded on resemblance The world was perceived specifically in four forms of resemblance convenience emulation analogy and sympathyantipathy Knowledge consisted of reading the world as a text the scientist would unearth and decipher all the signs that he read in the world Signs were interpreted in terms of resemblance In this epistemological framework knowledge is never knowledge of a thing but knowledge of the relationship of a thing to all other things In short the worlds was perceived in its totality knowledge being empty and infinite Foucault calls this mode of perceiving the world Commentary in the sense that knowledge consists in endless commentary on things A scientific book would consist of a huge collection of all the available descriptions of a thing by others In a sense written text was the foundation of the known world This episteme broke down around 1600 and was replaced by a new one The episteme of the Classic Era was founded on representation Descartes immediately comes to mind as the archetype of this new worldview he divided the world up into matter and mind The world was nothing but matter in motion to be grasped mathematically and mechanically The uestion now became how this knowledge of the world is possible all the elements of our scientific theories originate in ideas which themselves originate in impressions of external stimuli on our mind For the Classical Era knowledge was knowledge of our ideas and their relations In short the ordering of our mind of all the worldly things The grid that was aid over the world was one of order general grammar ordered our ideas as spoken words in propositions discourse natural history ordered all worldly things in hierarchies of classes based on structure and character taxonomy and the analysis of wealth ordered all money in terms of distribution through exchange which originated in the endless productivity of nature cultivated and Underlying these three domains of knowledge were key concepts such as representation identity and differentiation and order In natural history all natural objects from minerals to human beings were seen as finite manifestations of an infinite natural order What we see and what we subseuently speak about are our own artificially created tables of classes of things In the science of wealth all wealth was seen as money which signified value that itself derived from endless exchange of naturally produced goods This episteme is able to relate the physiocrats who viewed and as the summum bonum of wealth to Adam Smith who viewed division of abor and free trade as the summum bonum of wealth Lastly general grammar was the overarching theory that explained how words designated and articulated things how words are crucial in the ontological transformation of things into ideas through the verb and how words are derived from prior words and gain meaning In sum the Classical Era was preoccupied with finding order in the world and signifying this order through discourseThis episteme broke down around the end of the eighteenth century and was replaced by the episteme of Modernity Representation was substituted by Man himself To understand this the concept of organisztion is crucial During Modernity natural history was replaced by the science of iving beings biology the science of wealth was replaced by the science of production through Femalia labor economics and general grammar discourse was broken up into the science ofanguage philology the study of the Investing Made Simple: Index Fund Investing and ETF Investing Explained in 100 Pages or Less language of thought symbolicogic and Memoirs and Misinformation language asanguage Pag ibig Paalam na nga ba? literature Setting aside theast iterature all of these new sciences had in common that they were firmly rooted in organization A iving being is an organized totality of organs the capitalist mode rooted in organization A CAMARÓN DE LA ISLA living being is an organized totality of organs the capitalist mode production is an organized structure of capitalabour means of production etc and The Abyss and Other Stories language is an intricate system of words inflections etc organized by grammatical rules peculiar to thatanguage Biology economics and philology have in common that they are positive sciences in the sense that they empirically study objects in the world But unlike the Classical Era which ordered everything according to visible ualities of things the Modern Era studies visible objectivities of things according to deeper invisible principles Life production and grammatical rules are transcendental origins on which all the positivist theories are based Another thing these three sciences have in common is their historicity They are founded in temporality whether it is the accumulation of capital the growth and decay of Teaching in the Online Classroom: Surviving and Thriving in the New Normal living beings or the change and relativity ofanguages we are dealing with historical developments A third commonality between biology economics and philology is that they have man as their object of knowledge We study man as a I Am Ready to Die a Violent Death living being as a productive and consuming being and as a speaking being But here is a problem that forms the pivot of Foucault s whole project not only do these positivistic sciences have man as an object of knowledge man himself is eually the subject of this knowledge That is it is man who studies man and in so doing forms an intrinsic element of this knowledge According to Foucault this subjectivity is a radical break with earlier epistemes in Modernity Man has been invented The problem is Man is a double We already saw he plays both the role of object of his knowledge as well as the subject of his knowledge This duality is rooted in the finitude of man in his Being Man is finite ie temporality a rather Heideggerian echo oress The problems that Man poses for himself as knowing being 어느 날 공주가 되어버렸다 leads to a critical study of this concept of Man And through this philosophical criticism Man discovers four dualities1 The analysis of finitude shows us the duality finitude infinity Man himself as aiving being is finite yet Soldaţii: poveste din Ferentari life is infinite Man sife is nothing but the progress towards death 2 The analysis of Man also shows us the empirical transcendental duality Positivism the study of Man being and eschatology the destruction of Man conflict Phenomenology is a rather imperfect solution to this problem it seeks to return to actual experience yet is never able to overcome the intrinsic duality of empirical transcendentality3 The analysis of the Unthought Man thinks implying there is the Unthought In reflection man is able to view his Being in a dimension in which thought speaks to the Unthought and articulates itself in terms of this Basically Foucault is rather obscurely pointing to eg Hegel s unknown Marx s alienated man Freud s unconscious man etc In general terms the Unthought as positivistic object of knowledge4 Lastly the analysis of the retreat and return of Origins Man as a iving being is not his origin the origin retreats in man Through philosophical reflection Man is able to view his origin outside himself and this notion makes him realize the fact that his existence is temporalityI mentioned these four critical analyses of Man because they serve a two fold purpose First they show how tedious and obscure Foucault can be when he isn t analysing historical data and theories Second and importantly they point to Foucault s main thesis the study of Man Anthropology is the foundation of the Modern episteme Through this critical study particularly the resulting four unsolvable dualities they are the epistemological origin of fields ike phenomenology psychology history sociology psychoanalysis etc Man is dissolving himself Before the nineteenth century Man didn t exist with the invention of Man as the episteme of the modern world this changed But the result is that Man is through himself dissolving himself into a nothingness The death of Man after the Death of God they both are a strong echo of Nietzsche And Throughout The Book throughout the book seems obsessed with this Nietzschean analysis Man has destroyed God and is now busy self destructing What comes after him is still unclear just as Nietzsche was rather unclear about how his Superman of the future would The Most Beautiful Arrangement of Broken: 2 lookikeAccording to Foucault this anthropology so central in the modern western world is destroying its own foundation and in this sense is the heralding of the destruction of the Modern episteme and the heralding of a new episteme The book was published in 1966 yet even though I read it in 2020 we still seem to be in the age of Man Perhaps even so than ever before Which makes one wonder about the value of a book as this see the end of this reviewA Redrum The Innocent last important point of this book is the general scheme of things Foucault agrees that events at the historicalevel can be causes of the retreat or emergence of fields of knowledge During the nineteenth century industrial production can be seen as a force in the development of psychology just Joey Drew Studios Employee Handbook (Bendy and the Ink Machine) like the revolutions and social unrest can be seen as a force in the development of sociology But these new sciences couldn t have originated without a radical change on the underlying archaeologicalevel the order of knowledge changed and with this the foundation underlying the total superstructure of knowledge Organization replaced Order and Man was invented This is the condition that made these historical changes possible and not the other way around Tangentially Foucault presages his John Galsworthy - The Little Dream later works when he deals with the retreat and emergence of certain epistemological concepts He claims the nineteenth century saw the gradual retreat of function conflict and signification and at the same time the gradual emergence of norms rules and systems Of course readers vaguely familiar with Foucault can recognize the concepts of normalization and discipline both in Discipline and Punish 1975 and repression in The History of Sexuality 1984 from hisater worksAnyway Sword in the Storm (The Rigante Series, Book 1) let me close this review by return to an earlier remark of mine I haveeft out all the particular analyses of Foucault They are very interesting in their own right for example his treatment of Adam Smith as the breaking point in the science of wealth and David Riccardo as the first economist But my problem with his analyses of historical sources which is than three uarters of the whole book is that they are not only very selective Why these sources Why not others but importantly Foucault is interpreting them in a way that suits his purposes For example it is easy to find another scholar who offers us a totally different interpretation of Smith and Riccardo This is not meant to belittle Foucault s ambitious project I do admire his attempt and I find his originality and creativity highly rewarding But it does beg the uestion of how his main theory of change of epistemes at the archaeological evel holds up after the historical interpretations are eft out This La parole est un sport de combat: Bertrand Périer, Bertrand Périer, François Montagut, Audiolib: Amazon.fr: Livres leaves us with a fascinating hypothesis of how historical changes in our knowledge and theories are rooted in fundamental and radical shifts in the epistemes we employ And how these epistemes not only shape the world we perceive and act upon but also form us from our earliest days of youth This in and of itself is a very interesting hypothesis Yet the main problem I have with Foucault s approach is that he confounds epistemology with ontology Even if we grant his his grid this seems to imply that it is just one way for us of relating to the world But how is the world in its fundamental state of being In an old television debate with Noam Chomsky still accessible on Youtube highly recommended he explains how the succession of grids continuously makes certain things appear in the world and makes certain other things disappear But what does that say about the world the world underlying all of these grids in its original state Is it impossible for us to know this world in its original Being Is its original Being the collection of the manifestations within all these grids FINAL PARAGRAPH IN COMMENTS Betweenanguage and the theory of nature there exists therefore a relation that is of a critical type to know nature is in fact to build upon the basis of Püha ja õudne lõhn language a trueanguage one that will reveal the conditions in which all EXiting the JW Cult language is possible and theimits within which it can have a domain of validity p 161There s no need to beat around the bush The Order of Things is bar none the densest read on my shelf to date Philosophy tyros steer clear an entry The Warlord level text this is not To say that this was as difficult to read as it was to understand would be a heavy understatement Snippets patterned after the one above would freuently invite two and three peat reading. Ween the stars in the heavens and the features in a human face gave way to the modern sciences of biology philology and political economy The result is nothingess than an archaeology of the sciences that unearths old patterns of meaning and reveals the shocking arbitrariness of. ,

download Les mots et es chosesUne archéologie des sciences humaines

,

S to absorb before moving on to the next eually demanding ine of Foucaultian esoterica Michel Foucault writing in the French philosophy tradition is touted as a Tuning Containing the Perfection of Eighteenth Century Temperament the Lost Art of Nineteenth Century Temperment and the Science of Eual Temperme librarian of ideas and his works demonstrate such canonical breadth that they are surely not intended to be consumed in isolation Indeed you had better have a working understanding of the systems of knowledge throughout Western history if you stand any chance of deconstructing this significant opusFoucault s acumen and seemingly bottomless knack for depth are on full display in this his most ambitious and the one that propelled him to stardom work However even with a solid grasp of philosophy and the pivotal shifts in Western thought you must then also place these insights within the tramlines of the baroue prose Foucault has prepared Similitudes resemblances representation significations character the analytic of finitude empirico transcendental familiarity with this repetition of terminology will be critical if one is to grok theandscape Foucault has delicately painted The Order of Things An Archaeology of the Human Sciences 1966 is nothing Owned by the Elf less than a genealogy of ideas an intellectual ancestry of the Western mind Along the way Foucault somehow manages to retrace the entire development of science restricting his analysis to a specific slice of spacetime European culture since the 16th century It is a work so daunting in scope and so winged in its execution that it seems to relish in keeping the mind in a perpetual state of entanglement sputtering caroming as you eagerly await for a resting point to collect your wits and proceed further into the well He blinds you with brilliance and insists that you see Foucault ricochets between the intellectual giants of the Western world in rapid fire fashion traipsing from Spinoza to Descartes to Kant to Marx Freud and Adam Smith to Nietzsche seemingly all while assuming on the part of the reader a dissertationevel of intimacy with each Come preparedAs I understand it and I am most emphatically not claiming that I do Foucault is demonstrating that there do exist traceable patterns in the great developments of Western thought in terms of Dilemmas The Tarner Lectures 1953 limits possibilities and approaches to new and old knowledge but also discontinuities and breaks from old ways of thinking How clean these breaks were is of course a matter of debate He focuses in on three domainsinguistics and philology Vous n'aurez pas les enfants language biologyife and economics Prince Miros Enslavement (The Royal Captive, labor emphasizing how the intellectual boundaries present in each historical era shaped how man thought about these venues and how they approached and reflected on new developments and discoveries that pervaded our consciousness Whether we were categorizing or taxonomizing articulating or deconstructing we operated in the epistemes confined to our period of history but also turned toward new modes of discourse as ideas emerged out of the Western world s interminable civilizational marchThere is also the niggling uestion of man and how and where she figures into the whole grandiose state of affairs Foucault seems to be arguing that manike everything else is a historical construct and its relation to the order of nature pivots according to developments in each area of inuiry including but not The Initiation limited to the human sciences That is man s interpretation of man is a product of the historical development of the spaces that have most dominated the human intellect viz the human sciences of proto biology anthropology and psychoanalysis the social sciences of economics andabor and most intricately the all enveloping force of Cerita dari Digul language which is coextensive with every sphere with which we make contact Certainly man s shifting coordinates within the grid of knowledge and human inuiry is of special emphasis here in Foucault s sweeping manifestoIn the closing sections Foucault hints toward a new episteme something that is ill defined turbid hazy but which carries all the signs of a break from what came before He doesn t specify with any precision what this branching episteme consists of or which domains hasargely catalyzed its brachiation but he seems to think it is imminent as a reflection of the mid 20th century region Foucault occupiedClosing ThoughtsA work ike this is one which eludes classification much ike how the centerpiece of the book itself man resists arrangement within its relation to human knowledge The Order of Things is simply and not so simply sui generis transcending the common boundaries of empirical disciplines and even philosophy Foucault s writing is ornate painstakingly precise in places yet frustratingly ambiguous in others so much so that Native Time A Historical Time Line of Native America like me you might desire the opportunity to stop every now and again and ask uestions I wish I could say that I grasped the book in its overarching messages as well as its subtle analyses but this will reuire subseuent readingsikely several If you ve previously been introduced to Foucault or his French antecedents you may be in a better position to follow along But if you re The Reluctant Cowboy Morgan Ranch like me this will be a humbling read an intellectual tour de force that incessantly reminds you how much there is yet toearnFor a informed and capable post book analysis I recommend this page for a good starting point History shows that everything that has been thought will be thought again by a thought that does not yet exist p 372 I have now devoted nearly three months to doing close readings of nearly every book by Michel Foucault I can die happy Except I m confused I know A is for Activist less now than I did before And that s precisely the point We are stilliving with Philosophical ideas from the Classical Period ie humanism Neo Liberalism Capitalism etc Yet Foucault shows time and time again that the institutions established during the Classical Period have on a Reaching Out life of their own often times violently Yet we are all still trapped within the inertia of History A professor of mine explained everything I ever needed to know about Post Modern Sub I hadn t expected this book to be nearly as interesting as it turned out to be Unfortunately I ve only just finished it and I suspect I m going to need to think about it for a while yet before I really understand some of the arguments here but this is a stunningly interesting book I ve a feeling that if youooked up erudite in the dictionary This book was written on the basis of a joke by Borges where in a short story Borges gives a definition of animals from a supposed Chinese encyclopaedia The definition divides animals into a dozen or so categories animals belonging to the Emperor animals that The Lion and the Unicorn Socialism and the English Genius lookike ants when seen from a distance being but two of my favourite non mutually exclusive categories But while Foucault was Blood On A Foreign Shore laughing at this joke he realised that how we categorise the world says remarkable things about usThe other work of art described in this book also right at the start is Velasuez s Las Meninas Il wait while you search for this on google images if you Drop Everything Now Picturing Perfect like His interpretation of this art work is stunning but it takes most of the book to really understand his point in including itThis is a book that tracks three general areas of human enuiry natural history on its path to biology value and exchange on their way to economics and general grammar on its way toinguistics We start with each in the Renaissance and make our way to the present The main turning points come about a century apart from Renaissance to Classical from Classical to Romantic and from Romantic to ModernHis point is that the revolutions that each of these subjects experienced were remarkably consistent over all three even though these subject seek to explain uite different subject matters the way people have gone about structuring these subjects displays an order that says fascinating things about the underlying categories we use to structure our knowledge in particular epochs In the Renaissance for example one of the underlying ideas structuring the way we approached the world was a rather Outcast (Wiltshire University, literal interpretation of the Bible In relation to animals that means two stories from the Bible are of particular interest Noah s Ark and the Tower of Babel Why Babel Well prior to Babel we all spoke the originalanguage God gave us presumably somewhat similar to Hebrew and that was the anguage used by Adam to name the animals In this sense animals were marked by this original categorisation and so if we could only re create these marks these essentially inguistic features we would know something worth knowing of the mind of God of the mind of the creator and therefore something very important about how to order the animal kingdomWith the Classical period there was a fundamental shift away from seeking this kind of representational identity between words and animals now the task of natural history was pretty much to create a huge grid and for that grid to be filled with animals according to some or other organising principle For example you might classify plants by the number of petals their flowers have or the shapes of their eaves You wouldn t classify them according to how bitter they taste taste isn t a highly uantifiable sense or the colour of the plants colours change so you end up with a very imited number of criteria that you can classify plants a point that has Foucault commenting on how we classified as if the only sense we had was colour blind sight and using these you end up with a huge table with rows and columns and if you have done your job properly one day you might even be able to mathematically determine which plants are missing from this great grid of Unmarked Treasure Poems life because you will have the mathematical underpinning of the table ofife before youThe shift to the Romantic period is generally assumed to be an understanding however naive of evolution One of my favourite Marry Me Again Enchanted little things to say is that Darwin s grandfather had already understood evolution was a fact all Darwin did was show how it worked Now while this is oress true there was a much interesting revolution going on in Natural History one that would finally transform it into Biology And that is to move away from categorising animals and plants as things as collections of features and to finally see them as iving creatures in a dynamic relationship with their environment relationships always being interesting than things that is the features they have are only interesting on the basis of what they have to say about the objective ife tasks that the animal confronts These reduce down to seven I would need to Sandra Dodds Big Book of Unschooling look this up but basically digestion reproductionocomotion bugger not even half how hopeless is thatbut you get the idea Now the interesting thing here is that these processes are all essential to Excuse me are you a model? life but they are abstract you don t see digestion or reproduction directly two dogs shagging is not reproduction and so we have moved oneevel up from the kind of concrete reality the previous organising systems employed counting stuff Also how animals achieve these general and essential processes differs from animal and species to species even if the end result is abstractly the same The insect that breathes through its skin the fish that breathes through its gills the human that breathes with its Swede Dreams lungs all breathe We now have biology because we now haveife there was a real sense in which all of the plants and animals previously could have been dead and God s plan could still have been manifest to us now that ife is central *To Our Way Of Building *our way of building system to classify ife that is no onger the caseWhat is fascinating here is that Darwin is not the fulcrum on which the revolution turns but rather this move to the new science is about fifty years prior to Darwin and not even on the basis of evolution I think there is much to this it is a fascinating idea even if it doesn t prove to be right The book presents eually interesting histories of economics and inguistics the point being to show that the fundamental organising schemes in each of these eras and each of these subjects is much the same With economics for example the process moves from a fascination with exchange as the organising principle and creator of value as defined as simple barter and therefore demand and supply as being the origin of value through to Smith s understanding that value is essentially a uantification of the قصص الأنبياء labour contained in goods through to abstract notions of production Yet again the process is from seemingly concrete exchanges to an abstract understanding of the underlying organising principleAnd then things get really interesting There is a bit where he talks about modern understandings that I pretty much didn t understand he mentions Nietzsche aot here and just about every time he mentioned Nietzsche I stopped being able to follow him But what he does say that I finally could follow again was that the reason he has picked biology economics and My American Football Dream linguistics is because these are uintessentially the most basic of the Human Sciences If you talk about psychology sociology or any of the human sciences basically you are talking about either humanity as an animal humanity as an economically engaged member of society or humanity asinguistically aware Draw those three circles on your Venn Diagram and the overlapping sections allow you to or ess define all of the other human sciencesThis makes a very interesting response to Marx where Marx sees economics as the basis for human progress and as the underpinning of revolutions in thought Foucault is
SAYING THAT OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THESE 
that our understanding of these three economics inguistics and biology are the key defining and interrelated modes of progress in our understanding of the world The move towards abstract organising criteria with the dawn of Romanticism in all three of these subjects he Mammal Anatomy: An Illustrated Guide links oress to Kant s critical philosophy or Kant s transcendental philosophy ratherI can t really review this book without saying something about Nietzsche Foucault sees the death of God and therefore the simultaneous or thereabouts death of man the myth of the Complessità. Uomini e idee al confine tra ordine e caos last man and of the superman being the same as the death of man and of the myth of the eternal return of the same as being the key projects facing modern humanity The removal of all absolute criteria for organising the world presents us with a remarkable task how do we go about grounding our science our world view without such an absolute perspective Foucault s view is that our human sciences will move towards psychoanalysis ethnography andinguistics how people understand their personal identity how they understand their cultural identity and how they use Under Wraps language to make these transparent to themselves therefore are the central projects of human sciences He ends by discussingiterature and how Smash It! literature has moved so far from the Renaissance view ofanguage as being about attempting to parallel the notion of L'assaggiatrice language from the start of John s gospel God as the word that issues forth and creates the universe Nowiterature seeks to press anguage to its imits and to create emotional responses we are incapable of achieving elsewhere A kind of return in the Nietzscean sense Like I said a fascinating book and one I will need to spend time thinking about. Our received truthsIn the work that established him as the most important French thinker since Sartre Michel Foucault offers startling evidence that “man” man as a subject of scientific knowledge is at best a recent invention the result of a fundamental mutation in our cultu. ,