From: François Gagnon <francois.gagnon.1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 11:08:05 -0500
My appreciation of these things, in a very synthetic manner:
1. Archaeology: the historical study of discursive formations.
2. Genealogy: the historical study of the practices by and through
which these discursive formations are produced and reproduced (given
that they are never completely frozen).
3. Foucault wrote in The order of discourse that these were only
heuristically distinguishable, since in the actual historical
investigation you cannot understand one dimension without studying the
4. In my understanding, these are modes of investigation mobilized to
realize different historical studies of 'what we are today' (or
Le 05-11-29, à 17:35, Kevin Turner a écrit :
it is quite a while since i have posed a question to the list, and a
lot of new people have joined since then. so, i would first like to
say hello and welcome.
i have been reading a number of texts by foucault which discuss kant's
reflections on enlightenment and revolution, and have also been
reading some secondary commentary - by gordon, dean, and so on - which
discuss these texts by foucault. this has left me somewhat confused,
and my confusion runs as follows:
does foucault use the phrase "historical ontology" as a kind of
synonym for genealogy; or are archaeology and genealogy the method and
design of historical ontology. to put the question slightly
differently, what is the relationship between archaeology and
genealogy on the one hand, and historical ontology on the other?
regards - kevin.
laid by the gate at the foot of the garden my view stretches out from
the fence to the wall
no words could explain no action determine just watching the trees and
the leaves as they fall
Foucault-L mailing list