answers1: Genealogy Of Knowledge
answers2: In most cases Foucault's reference to genealogy has nothing
to do with the study of ones ancestors, like the following passage:
<br>
<br>
The genealogy of knowledge consists of two separate bodies of
knowledge: First, the dissenting opinions and theories that did not
become the established and widely recognized and, second, the local
beliefs and understandings (think of what nurses know about medicine
that does not achieve power and general recognition). The genealogy
is concerned with bringing these two knowledges, and their struggles
to pass themselves on to others, out into the light of the day. <br>
<br>
Genealogy does not claim to be more true than institutionalized
knowledge, but merely to be the missing part of the puzzle. It works
by isolating the central components of some current day political
mechanism (such as maintaining the power structure which diagnoses
mental illness) and then traces it back to its historical roots
(Dreyfus and Rabinow, p.119). These historical roots are visible to
us only through the two separate bodies of genealogical knowledge
described above. <br>
<br>
Foucault says, "Let us give the term 'genealogy' to the union of
erudite knowledge and local memories which allows us to establish a
historical knowledge of struggles and to make use of this knowledge
tactically today (Genealogy and social Criticism, p.42)." <br>
<br>
The genealogical side of analysis tries to grasp the power of
constituting a domain of objects. If a society were to institute the
role of medicine man, for example, and give him special privileges, we
would thereby "constitute the object of medicine man." Until we
established and institutionalized this practice, nothing could be
called a "medicine man." The genealogy explores what was not evident
because of the institutionalization of knowledge by those in power.
<br>
<br>
(See Discourse on Language which is the appendix in the Archaeology of
Knowledge.); Whereas archaeologystudies the practices of language (in
a strict sense), genealogy uncovers the creation of objects through
institutional practices (Dreyfus & Rabinow, p.104). Whereas the
archeological historian claims to write from a neutral, disinterested
perspective, the Nietzschean or Foucaultian genealogist admits the
political and polemical interests motivating the writing of the
history (Hoy, 1986, p.6-7).` <br>
For a richer account of this concept click here to read a brief
paraphrase of the first chapter of Foucault's The Archaeology of
Knowledge <a href="
http://users.sfo.com/~rathbone/foucau10.htm"
rel="nofollow"class=Clr-b>
http://users.sfo.com/~rathbone/foucau10....</a>
<br>
<br>
Here appears a fundamental principle for introducing Foucault's power.
He uses the genealogy precisely because it rejects the claim that
truth can be found by the exposition of historical sequences. Put
simply, change happens due to a conflict occurring nowhere. There is
no truth inherent in the study of historical developments; the phrase
itself would likely be contested by Foucault. Does this mean that the
genealogy pays little attention to the details of beginnings and ends
in history? "On the contrary, it will cultivate the details and
accidents that accompany every beginning; it will be scrupulously
attentive…[the genealogist] must be able to recognize the events of
history, its jolts, its surprises, its unsteady victories and
unpalatable defeats" (144). The genealogist does not ignore historical
sequences but instead declines to give them authority to dictate
truths on cause and effect. So of what use is this information on the
genealogy in this investigation of Foucault's power? To begin with, it
is a reminder of one element that makes Foucault accessible: the
common topical content of his genealogies. Further, the use of
genealogy introduces Foucault's thoughts on truth and knowledge. By
showing that truth does not conform to an origin and that historical
investigation does not inevitably lead to primary truth he reminds the
reader of the following: <br>
<br>
"In appearance, or rather, according to the mask it bears, historical
consciousness is neutral, devoid of passions, and committed solely to
truth. But if it examines itself and if, more generally, it
interrogates the various forms of scientific consciousnesses in its
history, it finds that all these forms and transformations are aspects
of the will to knowledge: instinct, passion, the inquisitor's
devotion, cruel subtlety, and malice" (162). <br>
<br>
This insight, that even historical inquiry that purports to be
objective is subject to other elemental processes such as the will to
knowledge, alerts the reader that what is at stake in this power
inquiry is more than just cause and effect, dominance and slavery. <a
href="
http://thenewhydra.blogspot.com/2007/04/foucault-and-genealogy.html"
rel="nofollow"class=Clr-b>
http://thenewhydra.blogspot.com/2007/04/...</a>
answers3: This Site Might Help You. <br>
<br>
RE: <br>
Genealogy and Foucault!? <br>
I am confused about what Foucault has to say about genealogy. <br>
I know that he borrowed the term from Nietsche, but the two of them
used the term differently. <br>
<br>
What does Foucault mean by 'genealogy', and how does this
relate to POWER?
