Abstract
In this paper, I examine the relationship between Foucault and psychoanalysis through the lens of problematization. Rather than asking the interpretive question of what was Foucault’s own attitude toward psychoanalysis, I analyze what sort of problem psychoanalysis might be thought to pose for a Foucaultian conception of critique. The bulk of the paper is devoted to a discussion of the three primary dangers that psychoanalysis is typically thought to pose for such a conception; these dangers are grouped under the headings of normalization, the drives, and power. After arguing that these three dangers can be overcome–by which I mean that they do not amount to reasons for believing that psychoanalysis is conceptually incompatible with Foucaultian critique–I then turn to a discussion of how psychoanalytic concepts and categories are related to Foucault’s method of critical problematization. There I argue that psychoanalysis, far from being incompatible with Foucault’s understanding of critique, actually serves as a model for his own critical method understood as a radical approach to writing history.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 170-186 |
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | Angelaki - Journal of the Theoretical Humanities |
Volume | 23 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Mar 4 2018 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Cultural Studies
- Philosophy
- Literature and Literary Theory