Foucault o el nihilismo de la catedra

by José Guilherme Merquior

Encompassing all of Foucault's published work, this book provides an array of secondary literature about Foucault including his philosophical history, his debts to other thinkers, and his complex relationship to French structuralism. This book raises important queries as to the ultimate value and legitimacy of his variety of philosophical rhetoric, with its attendant view of the role of the modern intellectual.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Sociology, Politics

304 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1985

Reviews

[Panos · Rating 4 out of 5]

Πολύ καλό, τεκμηριωμένο και αμείλικτο σε ό,τι αφορά την κριτική του στις ανεπάρκειες και στρεβλώσεις της φουκοϊκής σκέψης.

[Kamakana · Rating 3 out of 5]

120714: now this is more like what i expected. written in foucault's era, just after his death. so early work, lived assessment, caricatures in beginning. have a hard time reading this without thinking of the other foucault, especially may. perhaps would have been better to read this first, but then i might not have been interested in more. critical, in tone as much as content, wonder why the author wrote this. he might be an 'analytic' sort of phil, certainly not sympathetic with f's reasoning, f's sources, f's techniques. this makes me wonder why i have no trouble reading of this, a lot of trouble reading wittgenstein. f has provocative ideas, rather inexact histories, elaborate and extreme ideas of how institutions, practices, ways of thought, shift from one unconscious characterization of the real to the next...

but what exercises the author seems to be that f writes well. and does not lay out his arguments, definitions, histories, in any sort of linear pattern, with any clear causal relationships. he writes well, he seduces by rhetoric, he follows one vague overarching scheme- 'archaeology', 'genealogy'- from one concern to the next. even from the little read of his life, can see where merquior is mistaken, even from the little read describing f's selective tendency with history, get the sense merquior is mistaken. i am not a professional, i am not looking for some valid way of living in the universe, i do not think i am target demographic for this. i did enjoy reading it, however in error it seems sometimes. as in may's book, as in the background here, i enjoy the stimulus, the thoughts, but no real interest in defending it. i leave that to the 30 years of others since his death...

only reason it is on brazillit: written by a Brazilian diplomat...

[Corey Kellicut]

Merquior sums-up most of his views on p. 144:

"First, his history - as, I daresay, has been abundantly demonstrated throughout this book - is far from being always sound. No doubt it often opens up new perspectives and has thereby heuristic virtues. But its conceptual muddles and explanatory weaknesses (and mark: it is always an argumentative history, an histoire à thèse) more than outweigh its real contributions. Foucault's historical evidence is too selective and distorted, his interpretations too sweeping and too biased. Thus in the end, far from counting by itself, as research or insight, his history stand or falls with his Weltanschauung - and therefore falls."

[Sahand · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5
‏"شکاکیت جدید، که فوکو نخستین استاد آن است، از این 'کلبی‌مسلکی مخرب' (عین عبارت بوورس) برخوردار است که بانگ تبلیغ و موعظه برای خردستیزی و بی‌اعتبارسازی تعقل را از فراز مناره‌ی نهادهای مرکزی همان فرهنگی که سعی بلیغ در تخریب و براندازی‌اش دارد، سر می‌دهد. ‏و بنابراین نوعی 'حاشیه‌گزینی در عین شرکت در مراسم رسمی' است که ذات نفی‌گرایانه‌اش ایجاب می‌کند که از این وضعیت سود ببرد، بی‌آن که کمترین پشیمانی اخلاقی حس کند."

[Anderson Paz · Rating 5 out of 5]

O livro foi publicado em 1985, em inglês. Trata-se de uma análise crítica da obra de Foucault em ordem cronológica: da “História da loucura” à “História da sexualidade”. O argumento de Merquior é que a substituição da historiografia tradicional por uma crítica histórica engajada não justifica negar ou distorce dados.
São dez capítulos. No primeiro, Merquior apresenta o projeto de pensamento crítico de Foucault. Em seguida, o autor trata da “História da loucura na Idade clássica” (1961) e de “O nascimento da clínica” (1963). No terceiro capítulo, Merquior apresenta a obra “As palavras e as coisas”. O quarto capítulo é uma análise das epistemes de “As palavras e as coisas”. O quinto capítulo é uma apresentação dos fenômenos desenhados pela arqueologia de Foucault e suas incongruências.
O sexto capítulo é um estudo sobre “Arqueologia do saber” (1969). Em seguida, Merquior discute a obra “Vigiar e punir”. No capítulo oitavo, Merquior trata do conceito de “poder-saber” na constituição do mundo e do eu. No capítulo nove, Merquior apresenta a discussão de “História da sexualidade” com destaque para o volume “Uso dos prazeres”.
O último capítulo é uma análise crítica do pensamento de Foucault. Merquior conclui que:
1. A obra de Foucault tem várias desordens conceituais, distorções de fatos e generalizações tendenciosas.
2. A aversão de Foucault à racionalidade e ao iluminismo como mera opressão liberal-racional o levou a um estreito pessimismo cultural.
3. Foucault não desconfia que sua narrativa possa não ser correta, o que o leva a um paradoxo: se todo saber é suspeito e não há critério de objetividade, como pode sua teoria ser verdadeira?
4. Foucault não se importa em descobrir se há saber real no discurso. Sua concentração nas relações de poder por meio de discursos liquida a possibilidade de saber objetivo.
5. Foucault se tornou um "neoanarquista": sua teoria é meramente negativa (não propõe nada objetivamente) e irracionalista (contra a racionalidade universal).
6. A obsessão de Foucault pelo poder em pouco contribuiu para apreensão objetiva de mecanismos de poder.
7. A reação de Foucault contra a modernidade o levou a reduzir a racionalidade à mera invenção cultural histórica.
8. O pensamento de Foucault é um "niilismo de cátedra" sem sentido positivo ou objetivo. É apenas irracionalismo e negativismo para engajamento político.

[Tomislav · Rating 2 out of 5]

A very harsh - but fair - critique of Foucault, mostly from a rationalist, liberal perspective. Merquior criticizes basically everything about his work, numerous dilettantish mistakes in his historical studies, ideological distortions, vague definitions, overly self-confident claims and the general philosophy of rejecting truth in favor of political power struggle. The only thing he compliments is his writing style, which he sees as one of the main reasons for popularity of Foucault’s work. Regarding that, I cannot say that I liked the style of this book. While Merquior is an erudite and witty writer, the book is way too short and fragmentary for its ambitious goal. It covers all of Foucault’s main works and jumps too quickly from one topic to another.

Merquior often passingly mentions other authors – not only famous philosophers but also specialists in different branches of science and law – as if he assumes that the reader is already acquainted with them. Instead of introducing their work, context and then deliberately arriving at a conclusion, he just presents the conclusion and then moves to another author. Even with his references to Nietzsche, whose works I know well, I found this approach confusing. Merquior occasionally notes their differences in politics and attitudes towards Enlightenment, he sometimes puts Nietzscheanism under quotation marks, and the book even opens with Nietzsche’s quote which suggests a sort of Pyrrhonian or naturalistic tone of criticism which it does not follow. Overall, he seems to interpret Foucault as a legitimate heir to Nietzsche’s thinking, which I do not find very convincing.

Merquior describes Foucault as a neo-anarchist, committed to anti-bourgeois, anti-Enlightenment irrationalism, anti-Utopian, with a purely negative political attitude based on criticisms of institutions without any proposed alternative. He even made a disservice to the Left because by searching for power relations everywhere he muddled their main points while not providing any strong, objective basis for understanding power mechanisms, especially when compared with sociologists who previously dealt with that subject. It is not a bad book, most of the criticisms seem sound but they are not crafted into an orderly and comprehensive work.

[Zoonanism · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent, this fontana modern masters book alongside the one by Steiner on Heidegger and Leech's review of Levi Strauss must be of the best in the series. So concise yet unforgiving of Foucault's many flaws and pretenses.

[Teodor Rørbech · Rating 5 out of 5]

A critical analysis of Foucaults weaknesses and irrelevance in academia

[Minäpäminä · Rating 4 out of 5]

A commendable effort at mining Foucault's terrifying prose for actual claims and arguments. Merquior clearly separates his commentary from the exposition of F's thought.

[David Walters · Rating 5 out of 5]

Foucault, first published in 1985, is a short critical examination of the work of the French philosopher Michel Foucault. Written by José Guilherme Merquior, it is a wonderfully well-written book, and can be recommended to anyone looking for an introduction to Foucault.

[خرس · Rating 4 out of 5]

کتابی بسیار خواندنی با ترجمه زیبای نازی عظیما

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good critique of his work.