Foucault, normativity and critique as a practice of the self.
In this paper I distinguish between two main critical questions: 'how possible' questions, which look for enabling conditions (empirical or transcendental) and raise issues of epistemic normativity; and 'whether permissible' questions, which relate to conditions of legitimacy and ethical normativity...
| Publicado en: | Continental Philosophy Review Vol. 49; no. 1; pp. 85 - 102 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Mar2016
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=114309006&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 114309006 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 13872842 OEF jtl: Continental Philosophy Review issn: 13872842 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Mar2016 vid: 49 iid: 1 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 114309006 10.1007/s11007-015-9360-2 ppf: 85 ppct: 17 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 389KB tig: atl: Foucault, normativity and critique as a practice of the self. aug: au: Han-Pile, Béatrice affil: School of Philosophy and Art History, University of Essex, Colchester UK su: Normativity (Ethics) Transcendentalism (Philosophy) Epistemics Archaeology Justification (Ethics) sug: subj: Normativity (Ethics) Transcendentalism (Philosophy) Epistemics Archaeology Justification (Ethics) keyword: Conditions of possibility Critique Crypto-normativity Foucault Freedom Historical a priori Normativity Practices of the self ab: In this paper I distinguish between two main critical questions: 'how possible' questions, which look for enabling conditions (empirical or transcendental) and raise issues of epistemic normativity; and 'whether permissible' questions, which relate to conditions of legitimacy and ethical normativity. I examine the interplay of both types of questions in Foucault's work and argue that this helps us to understand both the function of the historical a priori in the archeological period and the subsequent accusations of crypto-normativity levelled against Foucault by commentators such as Taylor and Habermas. I chart the complex conceptual space available for a defense. After examining several possible replies (in particular deflationary and constructivist), I conclude that the most effective option, and the one that fits Foucault's approach best, is to refuse the demand for normative justification as self-defeating, and to opt for the cultivation of an appropriate ethical sensibility through an emphasis on critique as a performative practice of the self. I offer in conclusion some thoughts on what such practice may look like for Foucault. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Continental Philosophy Review is a copyright of Springer, 2016. All Rights Reserved. item: Continental Philosophy Review holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2016 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|