|
|
||||||||
In the field of critical philosophy, the view of Michel Foucault has been subject to very extensive discussion. It has been an ongoing puzzlement how he could reject any talk about ahistorical universals and at the same time claim philosophy - at least in its genealogic form - to be of critical importance. How could he claim any analysis to have only local significance, and at the same time take the view that some analyses can show other views to be problematic? According to what standards?
A common strategy against Foucault has been to state that he is not as...
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |