On the possibility of freedom beside the subject: Michel Foucault and the attempt of overcoming of the teleology of modern historicism

Alexander Lvov

doi:10.21638/11701/spbu17.2017.307

Authors

Alexander Lvov St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu17.2017.307

Abstract

Philosophy of Modernity had considered and laid two fundamental concepts as its basis: subject and method. In the course of history of thought, subject turned into such an epistemological constant, which became able, first, to establish itself, second, to determine truth and to establish its frameworks. This kind of articulation of subject became apt due to the methods Modernity introduced in the scientific paradigm, and Hegel’s ambitious project played here the greatest part. Thus, the philosophy of history became teleological — it elucidates the events in linear perspective gradually to the preset purpose. A task of the recent philosophical investigations, however, was to search for an alternative methodology beside the subject which could establish another programme of realising will to knowledge. This paper discusses Michel Foucault’s attempt to oppose the “transversal” philosophy of history to the Modern subjective paradigm in terms of the results he had achieved. Our inquiry becomes possible due to the Foucauldian archaeological method. His original epistemology makes the examination of frameworks of truth of subject as a concept possible. Being formerly a constitutional element, the subject then becomes a methodological problem. Such a consideration of a basic concept in Modern philosophy grants the possibility to study the development and elaboration of the methodological determinism, which supports the development of the pre-Cartesian subject. Concerning the results, we could name, firstly, the reconstruction of the historical retrospective of an element of Modern philosophy’s apparatus, and, secondly, an attempt to provoke the question on the possibility of freedom beside subject. Refs 15.

Keywords:

teleology, transversal approach, Michel Foucault, historicism, the practices of the self, the aesthetics of existence, archaeological method

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

References

Heidegger M. Gegel’ i greki [Hegel and the Greeks]. Heidegger M. Vremia i bytie [Being and Time]. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 2007, pp. 527–541. (In Russian)

Sergeev K. A ., Perov Iu. V. Gegel’ i sovremennoe istoricheskoe soznanie [Hegel, and the Contemporary Historical Consciousness]. Hegel G. W. F. Lektsii po istorii filosofii [Lectures on the History of Philosophy], Book 3. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 2006, pp. 5–82. (In Russian)

Latour B. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 1993. ix+157 p. (Russ. ed.: Latour B. Novogo vremeni ne bylo. St.Petersburg, Publ. Evrop. un-ta v S. Peterburge, 2006. 240 p.)

Latour B. Woolgar S. Laboratory Life. The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, New Jersey, 1986. 294 p.

Heidegger M. Evropeiskii nigilizm [The European Nihilism]. Heidegger M. Vremia i bytie [Being and Time]. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 2007, pp. 87–245. (In Russian)

Sergeev K. A. Renessansnye osnovaniia antropotsentrizma [The Renaissance Foundations of Anthropocentrism]. St. Petersgurg, Nauka, 2007. 591 p. (In Russian)

Descartes R. Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One’s Reason and of Seeking Truth (Guttenberg Project). Available at: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/59/59-h/59-h.htm part4 (accessed: 13.12.2016) (Russ. ed.: Dekart R. Rassuzhdenie o metode. Dekart R. Sochineniia [Works]. St.Petersburg, Nauka, 2006, pp. 93–131.)

Sergeev K. A., Perov Iu. V. Gegelevskaia istoriia filosofii v kontekste novoevropeiskoi metafiziki [The Hegelian Philosophy of History in the Context of the Modern Metaphysics]. Hegel G. W. F. Lektsii po istorii filosofii [Lectures on the History of Philosophy], Book 3. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 2006, pp. 5–61. (In Russian)

Eribon D. Michel Foucault. Moscow, Molodaia gvardiia Publ., 1996. 378 p. (In Russian)

D’iakov A. V. Mishel’ Fuko i ego sovremenniki [Michel Foucault and His Contemporaries]. St. Petersburg, Aleteiia Publ. 2010. 672 p. (In Russian)

Nietzsche F. The Birth of Tragedy Out of the Spirit of Music. Available at: http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Nietzsche-The-Birth-of-Tragedy.pdf. (accessed 13.12.2016) (Russ. ed.: Nietzsche F. Rozhdenie tragedii iz dukha muzyki. Nietzsche F. Sochineniia [Works], in 2 vols. Moscow, Mysl’, 1990, vol. 1, pp. 47–158.)

Naumova E. I. Proekt marksistskoi dialektiki L. A l’tiussera [The Project of L. A lthusser’s Marxist’s Dialectics]. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2013, is. 7, no. 1, pp. 14–17. (In Russian)

Althusser L. Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. New York and London, Monthly Review Press, 1971. (Russ. ed.: Althusser L. Lenin i filosofiia. Moscow, Ad Marginem Publ., 2005. 175 p.)

Foucault M. The Archaeology of Knowledge and The Discourse of Language. New York, Pantheon Books, 1972. 245 p. (Russ. ed.: Foucault M. Poriadok diskursa. Foucault M. Volia k istine: Po tu storonu znaniia, vlasti i seksual’nosti. Moscow, Magisterium, Publ. Kastal’, 1996, pp. 47–96.)

Foucault M. Volia k istine: po tu storonu znaniia, vlasti i seksual’nosti [The Will to Truth. Beyond Power, Knowledge and Sexuality]. Moscow, Kastal’ Publ., 1996. 447 p. (In Russian)