Archaeology or interpretation: Michel Foucault and Claude Lefort

On February 2, 1983, during his lecture at Collège de France, Michel Foucault criticizes the concept of political (le politique). According to Foucault, shift from politics (la politique) masks “the specific problem and set problems politics, dunasteia, practice game, game as a field experience with its rules normativity, inasmuch it is indexed truth-telling involves certain relationship oneself others for players” (2010, p. 159). le politique an unnecessary dimension transcendence that covers comprehension in between dunasteia politeia. The first term indicates constitutional framework defines statute citizens their rights, game. second, instead, names actual exercise power, happens, experience. These two spheres determine what democratic society. Therefore, not necessary all hides Foucault's text explicit attack on positions Claude Lefort, who those same years worked defining theory political. shows structure modern society which depend. It name symbolic dimension, references, explains difference Ancien regime, marked by religious organic structure. In other words, if external transcendent reference founded premodern society, characteristic societies without foundation. latter, conflict replaces already impossible unity. views illustrate divergent theoretical framework, different conception modernity democracy. They are theories indicate presence well trajectories 20th-century French philosophy, Lefort can be considered among most significant proponents. philosophical personal paths these authors clearest examples this bipolarity. If offers microphysics dispersion relation, Lefort's theory, power pole, unreachable otherness organizes entire social field. highlights disciplinary mechanisms methods subjectivity inaugurate age classique, devotes himself definition emergence uncertainty, loss However, milieu such emerge appears extraordinarily similar. Structuralism works Maurice Merleau-Ponty Jacques Lacan delimit common ground both reflections take shape. sense, oppositional I described reductive contact points instead quickly emerge: critique structuralism, history rejects any teleology presupposed continuity, reading does admit transcendence, phenomenology. From perspective, stay shared semantic space where they mutually understandable. To fully understand opposition authors, contingency foundations, step back analyze respective 1960s. way, possible discover series polemical references indicating ways analyzing clash cultural debate 1970s 1980s. aim essay reconstruct theories, inaugurating exploratory examination. Following few always scattered works, identify problematic around dialogue orbits. This mostly polemical, addressing harsh occasionally deceptive criticism leveled toward each another. will distinguish historical reasons oppositions order able draw stake beneath polemics. Moreover, following comparison, never attempted until now, try highlight peculiarities thought potential current debate. 1972, after more than decade research, publishes main work, Le travail l’œuvre, Machiavel, major texts Florentine Secretary (Lefort, 2012).11 only English version, titled Machiavelli Making, partial include some initial chapters. Through analysis Prince Discourses, traces “form” providing him, humanists before him present new cannot power.22 Archives EHESS contain courses 1975, 1976) analyzes birth role humanists, particular Coluccio Salutati. While structured language, presents itself static, hierarchical, indisputable structure, one, seen dawn Machiavelli, unifies former, latter divided itself. develops through internal precisely due lack context, states one could ninth chapter Prince, affirms body into humors—the nobles people—and them determines institutions.33 civil principality when he “I maintain reaches princedom either favor people or nobility, since humours found every politic. arise fact do wish commanded oppressed nobles, while desire command oppress people. opposed appetites, there arises cities three effects: principality, liberty, licence” (Machiavelli, 2005, 35). Again, must Machiavelli's defense tumults ancient Roman Republic 1996, pp. 16–17). strength greatness Rome derived ability govern division plebs Senate, trying extinguish hide it. Disunity therefore affirmed, productive freedom, evaded (Poirier, 2015). emerges context dispute characterizes internally fractured (Trinidade, 2013). Power element division, place directs requests legitimacy. Only throughout continuous battle recognize means terms division. form, empty place, because no longer incarnate, consubstantial subject principle, redefinition. image read contrasts Ancièn Regime was embodied king divine justification 1986, 292–306). says, pole whose depends organization community. As outcome conflict, inside but time, were gives shape completely attainable appropriable. paradoxical definition, says something about impossibility, form social, reach foundation, unity, coincide foundation immanent master emerge. contrary, open alterity. exhibits real revolution, useful tool describe feature continuously defined conflict. actually exercised, cause explanation. allows Thus, define itself, essence, separated, aware condition. kind has definition—of community, values, subjects—is questioned, representative interpretation. More that, according elements characterize also We thus say democracy modernity, evident. institution accepts groundlessness, impossibility society's total coincidence Power, characteristics: unattainable otherness. seems me understood instance multiplicity force relations sphere operate constitute own organization; process ceaseless struggles confrontations, transforms, strengthens, reverses them; support find another, forming chain system, disjunctions contradictions isolate another; lastly, strategies effect, general design institutional crystallization state apparatus, formulation law, various hegemonies (Foucault, 1978, 92–93).77 dispersed knowledge anticipated 1972–1973 lectures then Discipline Punish. See lesson March 28, 1973 (2015, 225-47, 1995, 26–28). intent still below continuity. Rather seeking single nucleus sovereignty would radiate, investigates local unstable power-knowledge discourses 27–28). perspective meaning examine micro-physics, immanence, renouncing totality, origin. exist social. Everything traced confines contingency. expression relationships follow sense strategy. way unambiguously “if true […] conceived relationships, perhaps we need go further, persona decipher basis strategy relationships” 97). elevated key figure understanding contemporary original political, Florentine, view, became character aside 2003, 18).88 Alain Brossat notes anti Machiavellianism unsatisfactory, superficial responds argumentative tactical need. target be, fact, just Lefort. “En clair, visant ‘nuage’ entend bien atteindre cette autre cible qui se tient derrière nuage—Claude dont magnum opus et thèse doctorat l’œuvre Machiavel été publié en 1972. ne s'en prend jamais explicitement à mais ses raisons s'opposer lui portent au-delà leurs racialement différentes Machiavel” (Brossat, forthcoming, 146). certainly little value. Nevertheless, difficult detect deeper Not ideas here, being. But controversy sign debate, deep disagreement emerging groups people, now turn. Will Knowledge published 1976. During year, issue journal “Libre” appears. Its editorial board consisted Miguel Abensour, Cornelius Castoriadis, Pierre Clastres, Marcel Gauchet, Luciani. One representatives thought, began École des Hautes Études Sciences Sociales, dominated intellectual time earlier had occupied faculty philosophy Vincennes University.99 For see Marchart (2007), Breaugh al. (2015), Couture (2019). opening article review, entitled “Nowadays” (Maintenant) signed takes opportunity line group position author uses 1968 date consider 8 have preceded passed events May up assessment France. prior renewed scientific spirit linguistics, rational networks, affected humanities. clear approach: even heterogeneity, share fascination formalism under horizon reality. object becomes sufficient Any knowable knowing suppressed discourse removed. summary, kinds eliminate interpretation, symbolic. obviously polemic targets. conceals object, systematizing objects within network neutralizes 1977, 2007, 275–299). 1968, underlines overturn reject method. calls question idea science theory. discourse, reduced coercion. Despite innovative aspect, nothing bring objectivism level. characterized circumvention interpretation structuralism. Even reduces known ratios strength. here Wilhelm Reich Herbert Marcuse, above Gilles Deleuze Foucault. Although explicitly mentioned, criticism. best create empty, placing operations, doers appear simple intersection or, better, doers: being, given level, part technique converts him/her controller controlled, and, human indefinite number excitations produce resistance 285).1010 My translation. light dimension: task. neither institutions nor extracted multiple networks equally matters science. care word, despite perversion use, us think whole social—not substance—but differentiated milieu, generality representation work representation, arranged matter identity outside wherein individuals identifying access 294). Once again simplifies aspects Foucauldian bringing closer Marcuse. Beneath aspects, however, trace divide authors. better them, 1960s, half 1960s marks, commitment historicization forms 1988, 2003b). After publication Les mots les choses 1966, defend method investigation 2001). Réponse au Cercle d’épistémologie “Cahiers pour l'analyse” 1998, 279–296). short philosopher answers questions posed clarification transition moves. beyond explanation past pages outline mode investigation. Here, stresses how been lens permanence, long periods, regularities apparent disorder events.1212 stage Nouvelle Histoire Annales particular, Fernand Braudel. distinctive approach O'Farrell (1989), Flynn (2005 Gutting 29–48), Falzon (Falzon, O'Leary, Sawicki, 2013, 282–298). Fracture incoherence issues historians circumvent, broader stable framework. A unjustified notions—causality, tradition, influence, development, teleology, mentality, era—holds thinking becoming. admitted examination get rid them. analyses Gaston Bachelard Georges Canguilhem, proposes deconstruct notions out fiction deal 303) later relate shaping knowledge. recognizing unitary plurality events. path reversed: starting fragmentation, interact reconstructed.1313 O ’ Farrell (1989, 44–64). implies deconstruction constitution interaction discursive elements. Such method, conceiving consistently remains (Revel, 59–63). unities questioned appearing immediately: book oeuvre (œuvre). much realize exists per se. rather dot very physiognomy depend on. offer you shake your hands, unity relative based wider 303–304). notion similar greater problems. Apparently, sum referred proper author. soon tries clarify means, escapes. link immediate. addition writings name, may pseudonym, designed printed life remain draft death. Brief, presuppose choices. Reducing coherence “function expression” compose seem solutions. consists preliminary interpretative operation 305).1414 themes “What author?” 205–222). transcription speech France 1969. Notions uninterrupted continuity: organized advance datum, unalterable Indeed, origin acts background postulates. assumes fix, eruption event. continuity guaranteed secret 305–306). second postulate, directly connected first, manifest “already said” “never said.” Every traceable previous semi-silence, hollow expressed. assured flow constant, silent, connected. hidden principle play immediacy, grasping events.1515 influenced Friedrich Nietzsche. regard least “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History” 369–392) Righetti (2012). short, deconstructing unreflected continuities, showing functions find, origin, composed individual statements. project pure description facts 306), immanent, limited finite set, language sequences formulated. Archaeology Knowledge, 1969, illustrates 2002). archaeological explained, difference, describing statements singular practices, discontinuity 2002, 31). Adopting methodology disregarding transcendental contingency, appearance, rule.1616 study Dreyfus Rabinow (1983) continues important mean scene ex nihilo chaotic emergence. everything said; statement formulated time. Statements foremost a-priori represents condition law circumscribes said. recall universal theorized Rather, implicated regulates 142–143).1717 reworks historicizes presented Edmund Husserl Origin Geometry. cf. Han (2002) wrote. systems call archive”: said, system formation transformation statements” scheme inserted, speak, totality. last depth episteme unite, period, practices give rise epistemological figures, sciences, possibly formalized systems” 211).1818 (2001) episteme. concepts, far proposing capable giving history, refer historicized commanding discourses, relationships. attempt thinking, empirical-transcendental concepts a-priori, archive, episteme, conditions possibilities phenomena. adds exists, is, pronounced. archaeology, becoming disregard He describes regulated elements, entirely contingent development core 1950s. challenge reason discontinuity, progressive terms—the fractures becoming—and synchronic coexistence historicity 46–77). His moves against rationalist theories—Hegel, Husserl, Marx—that reason. argues, unable account societies—the Asian Hegel Marx so-called primitive ethnologists—which fit image, persisting situation stagnation 47–51). philosopher, explain temporalities “unconsciously chosen” Temporalities result culture. ethnological studies, early 1950s, corroborates explanation, sort self-interpretation, meaning.1919 Since Mauss, Roger Bastide, Lévi-Strauss, classics American culturalism (Linton, Kardiner, Bateson) British functionalism (Malinowski, Evans-Pritchard). anthropological Moyn (2013). Accepting reconstructions ethnologists, thinks “institutes itself” space, cultures, self-representations societies, institutions, so many temporality change. specify involve restoration attribute. makes self-representation.2020 closeness Lacan's “mirror stage” Beyond evidence (the knew attends semin