The aim of this article is to contribute to the recently revived debate over the normativity of Foucault's genealogical method. More specifically, I shall respond to Fraser's charge that Foucault's rejection of humanism is unjustified because he cannot state why a totally panopticized, autonomous society would be objectionable. After dismissing a non-normative defence strategy of Foucault's work, I shall proceed as follows: firstly, I shall clarify Foucault's model of critique as a practice of problematization geared to free his addressees from their captivation to the system of truths sustaining the power mechanisms of modern biopolitics. Secondly, I shall argue that Fraser's society should be resisted because it would reproduce this regime of captivity, thereby obstructing the exercise of freedom as self-transformation. Thirdly, I shall contend that Foucault's normative orientation to a post-humanist conception of freedom as self-transformation finds a contextual, explanatory account in his attempt to revitalize the emancipatory project of Enlightenment modernity through a transformative problematization of our normative commitments. Moreover, I shall show that the standard of validity of this effort is represented by Foucault's exemplary embodiment of the critical ethos of the Enlightenment in both his style of existence and theoretical activity. Finally, the article terminates by illustrating three shortcomings of Foucault's normative approach.
Among the possible subjects of the conference, I had proposed an interview about prisons, about the particular problem of prisons. I was led to give up on it for several reasons: the first one is that, during the three weeks I've been to Japan, I've come to notice that the problem of penality, criminality, and prison was posed according to very different terms in our society and yours. Through the experience of one prison -when I speak about the experience of one prison I do not mean that I've been jailed, but rather that I've visited one prison, even two, in the Fukuoka region -I've also come to notice that, in comparison to what we know in Europe, it represents not only an improvement, an advancement, but also a genuine modification that would require us to be able to reflect on and discuss with Japanese specialists on this issue. I felt ill at ease to talk to you about problems as they are currently posed in Europe, when you have so important experiences. And finally, to put it shortly, the problem of prisons is but one element, one piece within a set of more general problems. The interviews I had with various Japanese have persuaded me that it would be more interesting to bring up the general climate in which the issue of prison, the issue of penality, arises together with a certain number of questions marked by an actuality just as real and urgent. Hence, you will forgive me for giving a talk more general than it would be if it had been limited to the problem of prison. If you hold it against me, you will tell me.Surely, you know there exists in France a journal called Le Monde, which we are used to calling, with much solemnity, a "major evening journal". In this "major evening journal", a journalist once wrote the following, which caused my surprise and led me to reflect to the extent I can. "Why, he wrote, do so many people today raise the question of power?" "One day", he continued, "one will be undoubtedly amazed that the question of power has so intensely troubled us during all the late 20 th century".If they reflect a little bit more, I don't think that our successors can long be surprised that, precisely during all the late 20 th century, the people of our generation have raised, with so much insistence, the question of power. After all, if the question of power faces us, that is not because we have raised it. It has come up, it was posed to us. It has been posed to us by our actuality, that's for sure, but also by our past, a quite recent past that has just barely come to an end. After all, the 20 th century knew two great obsessions with power, two great fevers that exacerbated the manifestations of power. These two great obsessions, which dominated the core, the middle of the 20 th century, are of course fascism and Stalinism. Certainly, both fascism and Stalinism replied to a precise and specific conjuncture. Undoubtedly, fascism and Stalinism brought their effects to dimensions unknown up to that moment and one can hope,
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.