http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195?format=rss Tribe.net. Local Connections http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#e5c95d8c-ea90-4cf8-9d50-ada86e9941df (i wish history of philosophy was taught in philosophy departments. it seems to me, at least in the us, most philosophy departments have analytic leanings). sigh. :) Sun, 07 Jan 2007 00:20:41 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#e5c95d8c-ea90-4cf8-9d50-ada86e9941df $item.owner.firstName 2007-01-07T00:20:41Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#b3c9dc62-c91a-491c-a4f7-ea70fa22513b > yes, but did hegel say anything original? or did he simply write a history of philosophy Personally, I would say, yes, he made many profound original and contributions. And,love him or hate him, writing a history of philosophy was itself a monumental contribution to philosophy. Before Hegel, history of philosophy was not taught in philosophy departments. These days, it's most of what is taught. This is a revolutionary insight - that philosophy is wed to the processes of history, and is not mere abstraction. Sat, 06 Jan 2007 20:50:12 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#b3c9dc62-c91a-491c-a4f7-ea70fa22513b barnaby 2007-01-06T20:50:12Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#76caaafc-f3a8-4771-b881-8996b52e3373 yes, but did hegel say anything original? or did he simply write a history of philosophy -- culminating, naturally, in him and in the German Spirit <barf> Fri, 05 Jan 2007 16:22:57 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#76caaafc-f3a8-4771-b881-8996b52e3373 ... 2007-01-05T16:22:57Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#9a3722bb-eaf3-4e07-aa71-d0a69ba704c6 I read Foucault as strongly believing in moments of freedom - they simply doesn' t occur as the outcome of historical unfoldings. But it does seem to me that the bifurcation itself is a moment of freedom, and one Foucault wants to bring about by tracing it back to its origin. I also wouldn't say that the fact their views are dissimilar in some ways doesn't mean they are dissimilar in all ways. It may be that in some regards they may be 'lumped together'. Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:44:13 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#9a3722bb-eaf3-4e07-aa71-d0a69ba704c6 barnaby 2006-01-27T23:44:13Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#debb2db0-bcb5-44c4-9399-c1c512cbc1a8 THere is some sense that both seem to be concerned with emancipatory practives. But I would disagree that they should be lumped together at all really. For hegel history eventually resolves its contradictions and comes to an end of some sort. For Foucault this isnt so. You never get outside of power knowledge realtions. There is no articualtion of freedom outside of realtions of power. You never get "free" in the liberal sense of the term. Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:20:14 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#debb2db0-bcb5-44c4-9399-c1c512cbc1a8 MAXL 2006-01-27T14:20:14Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#0084bc57-e6ca-42c0-bf91-3cf0e3a08bdc hegel was the hardest philosophy class I took in college . . . now i get drunque instead . . . Sat, 08 Oct 2005 03:03:37 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#0084bc57-e6ca-42c0-bf91-3cf0e3a08bdc Με||όώ 2005-10-08T03:03:37Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#470d5db8-9bb0-4654-aa02-820ebef0ffbc I had a Hegel professor in college that claimed Hegel subsumed all philosophy since. He was kind of a nut. Wore a cape to class sometimes. He would play this game with us where we would name a particular idea that we found in another thinker's work, and he would find a passage from Hegel that said basically the same thing. I have to admit, we rarely stumped him. Derrida passages could stump him, but somehow that feels like cheating... Hegel certainly doesn't always reach the same conclusions as the other thinkers, but an aweful lot of the concepts were worked out by him. So, as much as I don't like his overall system, I have to admit, as a thinker, re hules. Sat, 08 Oct 2005 00:09:19 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#470d5db8-9bb0-4654-aa02-820ebef0ffbc Nathan 2005-10-08T00:09:19Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#fda3efc9-5d54-4ffb-9c85-bd0b42f7e748 Huck Fegel? Regel hules! Fri, 13 May 2005 05:59:38 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#fda3efc9-5d54-4ffb-9c85-bd0b42f7e748 barnaby 2005-05-13T05:59:38Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#a54e206a-b37b-4466-a951-58e37a607832 Huck Fegel! ok, this from chapter 5 of V Descombes' superb volume "Modern French Philosophy:" "Hegel had said that difference is contradictory in itself. But the question now is to pave the way for a non-contradictory, non-dialectical consideration of difference, which would not envisage it as the simple contrary of identity, nor be obliged to see itself as 'dialectically' identical with identity. In tackling this difficulty, French philosophy — in the form of Gilles Deleuze and Jacques Derrida — at last approaches the crux of the matter. We come finally to that remarkable point of modern metaphysics which all preceding discourse had indicated like a flickering compass. ..." --Adrian Fri, 13 May 2005 01:04:48 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#a54e206a-b37b-4466-a951-58e37a607832 Adrian 2005-05-13T01:04:48Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#0a96634d-c8ab-4ce4-9165-91ca37b1a602 Kojeve's commentary on Hegel, as I recall, was the "commentary". Escape from Hegel? We are all Hegelians even if we are "anti-Hegelians" said one of my good friends. I think he had a point. Gilton Working through Descartes, Kant, Hegel is like working through modern physics. You need them in order to understand all the "good" stuff. : ] Wed, 11 May 2005 17:33:25 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#0a96634d-c8ab-4ce4-9165-91ca37b1a602 Gilton 2005-05-11T17:33:25Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#a7a5319d-58d9-4dfc-9af8-6d29f6e13d66 Freedom from Hegel? There's a fantasy? Caught, we are, between Hegel and Kant. I quite like it here... Fri, 06 May 2005 22:09:00 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#a7a5319d-58d9-4dfc-9af8-6d29f6e13d66 Emanuela 2005-05-06T22:09:00Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#70f233de-ec9b-4d29-b941-37160544dad7 > Identity should be founded on difference, rather than the other way around. IMHO we should leap clear of both the one and the many. Both are conceptual imputations. But as a practical matter, if nothing else, I think both approaches have a certain therapeutic value. Bringing identity to differance unites disjunction, while bringing difference to identity liberates identity from conceptual grasping. Fri, 06 May 2005 03:56:22 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#70f233de-ec9b-4d29-b941-37160544dad7 barnaby 2005-05-06T03:56:22Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#0ab32d75-1206-4a56-8c43-137115de48cf Good tips -- it would b nice to be free of him though, wouldnt it?! Hegel, I mean.. . Hardt actually has a good section on the manner in which Deleuze is post-Hegelian, that being that for Deleuze, H's dialectic is a false movement and a bad way to start off, as it introduces contingency into the definition of identity. Deleuze turn's H upside down. Identity should be founded on difference, rather than the other way around. Fri, 06 May 2005 01:01:18 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#0ab32d75-1206-4a56-8c43-137115de48cf Adrian 2005-05-06T01:01:18Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#226a2d0f-4b55-49f1-bbfb-824e9bd9dc00 Descombes' book is one of my favorite all time phil books. But if you want inspired Deleuze intro, go to Michael Hardt's book on him. Fri, 06 May 2005 00:44:27 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#226a2d0f-4b55-49f1-bbfb-824e9bd9dc00 Adrian 2005-05-06T00:44:27Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#2ca07028-c6d3-4540-bb05-588ab0631778 It doesn't look like he spends much time on Deleuze, so it's understandable.... I'm not used to reading secondary material, but it seems like it can really help in getting the big picture. Wed, 04 May 2005 16:13:14 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#2ca07028-c6d3-4540-bb05-588ab0631778 barnaby 2005-05-04T16:13:14Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#2f7bf58e-2f52-4d91-8bde-b7668c87c4bf Oh gosh, you're right, sorry, my mistake. Truth be told, I haven't looked at that book in over ten years... I shall check b4 posting next time. :) Wed, 04 May 2005 07:16:23 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#2f7bf58e-2f52-4d91-8bde-b7668c87c4bf Emanuela 2005-05-04T07:16:23Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#1de80d96-7c14-47ea-9601-e60b098d8789 The Descombes book I looked at on French Philosophy has a chapter on Deleuze and Derrida. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0521296722/qid=1115088363/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-7076980-8859954?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 Tue, 03 May 2005 02:47:06 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#1de80d96-7c14-47ea-9601-e60b098d8789 barnaby 2005-05-03T02:47:06Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#9ce470b0-8cca-4fd6-98de-82855d598e92 Descombes doesn't do Deleuze - it's a very intro sort of book. But for French Hegel, go to Kojeve himself, and Hippolyte's lovely reading of Hegel too. You'll see where Sartre et al get it from. Tue, 03 May 2005 01:31:14 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#9ce470b0-8cca-4fd6-98de-82855d598e92 Emanuela 2005-05-03T01:31:14Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#0f515fb5-0052-4180-ad60-5cf35631b8e1 Thanks Adrian. I haven't checked out Deleuze, but now I am inspired to do so. I was beginning to think it might not be possible in our epoch to conceptualize beyond the horizons Hegel delimited. The Descombes book you mentioned looks excellent - do you think it does justice to Deleuze? Mon, 02 May 2005 16:19:47 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#0f515fb5-0052-4180-ad60-5cf35631b8e1 barnaby 2005-05-02T16:19:47Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#ab3dbb2b-0e2f-4a61-81c3-0e2d67c0050a Barnaby, Many of the French of that period wrote about Hegel insofar as they all took Kojeve's class on Hegel (which was given w/ a slightly marxist twist of course). They either wrote against dialectics or through dialectics. So you may see strategic similarities (plus there are only so many strategic moves you can make). IMHO Deleuze is one of the few post Hegelian, post Dialectical thinkers. I think he would suggest we not interpret Foucault back through Hegel, but get deeper into his difference. Deleueze's book on Foucault is a masterpiece. So too is Vincent Descombes' Modern French Philsophy, in which he covers Hegel's impact on the French. Mon, 02 May 2005 16:14:15 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#ab3dbb2b-0e2f-4a61-81c3-0e2d67c0050a Adrian 2005-05-02T16:14:15Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#190b17e0-0af4-46d0-8b74-d64397182b8c ?? Mon, 04 Apr 2005 19:20:41 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#190b17e0-0af4-46d0-8b74-d64397182b8c barnaby 2005-04-04T19:20:41Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#5c000ff7-e881-4316-9638-86d9201d2b36 LOL. Oui. Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:38:52 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#5c000ff7-e881-4316-9638-86d9201d2b36 Ashley 2005-04-04T17:38:52Z http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#6be3e08a-4949-4e8d-a4cd-233333b62c79 My basic interpretation of Foucault's genealogy is that he traces conceptual categories to moments of bifurcation in an effort to illuminate: 1) the pre-givenness of most or all of our concepts, and 2) the periodic moments of conceptual freedom that occur at the point of bifurcation or rupture. Now that I am finally getting around to taking an in-depth look at Hegel, this is striking me as deeply Hegelian in its essence, although Foucault has an anti-humanist streak that is foreign to Hegel. Consider the following excerpts from Hegel's essay "The Difference Between Fichte and Schelling's Systems of Philosophy": "To sublimate such oppositions that have become fixed is the sole interest of reason. This interest does not mean that reason is against opposition and limitation in general; for necessary bifurcation is a factor of life which forms itself through eternal opposition, and totality is possible in the highest liveliness only through restoration out of the highest separation. Reason is only against the absolute fixation of bifurcation by the understanding.... When the power of unification disappears from the life of men and opposites have lost their living relation and reciprocity and gain independence, then the need for philosophy originates." I don't claim to be an expert on either Foucault or Hegel, but this excerpt does seem to be extremely germaine to Foucault's philosophical project. Thu, 31 Mar 2005 18:02:11 GMT http://frenchphilo.tribe.net/thread/a34f9e4d-d276-47c1-9644-bb4c7041f195#6be3e08a-4949-4e8d-a4cd-233333b62c79 barnaby 2005-03-31T18:02:11Z