Through an ambitious and critical revision of Michel Foucault's investigation of ethics, James Faubion develops an original program of empirical inquiry into the ethical domain. From an anthropological perspective, Faubion argues that Foucault's specification of the analytical parameters of this domain is the most productive point of departure in conceptualizing its distinctive features. He further argues that Foucault's framework is in need of substantial revision to be of genuinely anthropological scope. In making this revision, Faubion illustrates his program with two (...) extended case studies: one of a Portuguese marquis and the other of a dual subject made up of the author and a millenarian prophetess. The result is a conceptual apparatus that is able to accommodate ethical pluralism and yield an account of the limits of ethical variation, providing a novel resolution of the problem of relativism that has haunted anthropological inquiry into ethics since its inception. (shrink)

Within anthropology, as elsewhere in the human sciences, there is a tendency to divide knowledge making into two separate poles: conceptual (theory) vs. empirical (ethnography). In Theory Can Be More than It Used to Be, Dominic Boyer, James D. Faubion, and George E. Marcus argue that we need to take a step back from the assumption that we know what theory is to investigate how theory—a matter of concepts, of analytic practice, of medium of value, of professional ideology—operates in anthropology (...) and related fields today. They have assembled a distinguished group of scholars to diagnose the state of the theory-ethnography divide in anthropology today and to explore alternative modes of analytical and pedagogical practice. Continuing the methodological insights provided in Fieldwork Is Not What It Used to Be, the contributors to this volume find that now is an optimal time to reflect on the status of theory in relation to ethnographic research in anthropology and kindred disciplines. Together they engage with questions such as, What passes for theory in anthropology and the human sciences today and why? What is theory's relation to ethnography? How are students trained to identify and respect anthropological theorization and how do they practice theoretical work in their later career stages? What theoretical experiments, languages, and institutions are available to the human sciences? Throughout, the editors and authors consider theory in practical terms, rather than as an amorphous set of ideas, an esoteric discourse of power, a norm of intellectual life, or an infinitely contestable canon of texts. A short editorial afterword explores alternative ethics and institutions of pedagogy and training in theory. Contributors: Andrea Ballestero, Rice University; Dominic Boyer, Rice University; Lisa Breglia, George Mason University; Jessica Marie Falcone, Kansas State University; James D. Faubion, Rice University; Kim Fortun, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Andreas Glaeser, University of Chicago; Cymene Howe, Rice University; Jamer Hunt, Parsons The New School for Design and the Institute of Design in Umea, Sweden; George E. Marcus, University of California, Irvine; Townsend Middleton, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Deepa S. Reddy, University of Houston–Clear Lake; Kaushik Sunder Rajan, University of Chicago. (shrink)

Foucault characterizes ethics as “the reflexive practice of freedom”. He does not have the ambitions of the usual moral philosopher. Foucault develops a robust conceptual apparatus appropriate to the ethical domain, but he does not seek an exhaustive stipulation of its invariant features. Instead, he explores and elucidates the problematics of the reflexive practice of freedom that genealogically connect an extended family of ethical systems. His exploration is increasingly confined within the boundaries of what the author identifies as an analytical (...) triangle that connects self‐care, the governance of others, and parrhesia. The triangle coalesces first in the third volume of The History of Sexuality and specifically in Foucault's treatment of gnothi seauton – the Pythian imperative to “know thyself.” It is the most effective frame through which to assess both the content and the limits of what with qualification can be cast as Foucault's ontology and epistemology of ethics. (shrink)

Since the early 1970s, European thinkers have departed notably from their predecessors in order to pursue analytical programs more thoroughly their own. Rethinking the Subject brings together in one volume some of the most influential writings of Foucault, Habermas, Bourdieu, Pizzorno, Macfarlane, and other authors whose ideas have had a worldwide influence in recent social history.The anthology is testament to the central importance of three contemporary themes, each familiar to earlier thinkers but never definitively formulated or resolved. The first two (...) concern the nature and modalities of power and legitimacy in society. The third, and most fundamental, deals with the nature and modalities of the ”self” or ”subject.”These themes owe their special contemporary relevance to an array of events—from the collapse of colonialism to the birth of test-tube babies. James Faubion’s introduction traces the historical context of these influential events and themes. It also traces the lineaments of a still inchoate intellectual movement, of which the writers included in this anthology are the vanguard. (shrink)

The fourth to appear of a projected six volumes, the third volume of Dilthey’s Selected Works is a meticulous, eminently responsible translation of the seventh volume of his Gesammelte Schriften. Its textual corpus offers many repetitions of terms and themes, concepts envisioned, revised, and discarded, alternative formulations of the same proposition or postulate, sentences begun but left unfinished. It provides a fitting autograph of the thinker whom writing made anxious and who was ready with rare confidence to identify the human (...) experience of “inadequacy” or “aversion” as the primary affective motor at once of hermeneutical progress and of the “nexus of the great world events”. Amid an array of drafts and supplements, however, the corpus also includes Dilthey’s most sustained and systematic contribution to a critique of historical reason, a “fourth critique” that remains true to Kant’s methodological precedent even as it draws regularly on Husserl’s lexicon and semantic analyses. The editors adopt the title of that critique as the subtitle of the third volume itself. (shrink)

The fourth to appear of a projected six volumes, the third volume of Dilthey’s Selected Works is a meticulous, eminently responsible translation of the seventh volume of his Gesammelte Schriften. Its textual corpus offers many repetitions of terms and themes, concepts envisioned, revised, and discarded, alternative formulations of the same proposition or postulate, sentences begun but left unfinished. It provides a fitting autograph of the thinker whom writing made anxious and who was ready with rare confidence to identify the human (...) experience of “inadequacy” or “aversion” as the primary affective motor at once of hermeneutical progress and of the “nexus of the great world events”. Amid an array of drafts and supplements, however, the corpus also includes Dilthey’s most sustained and systematic contribution to a critique of historical reason, a “fourth critique” that remains true to Kant’s methodological precedent even as it draws regularly on Husserl’s lexicon and semantic analyses. The editors adopt the title of that critique as the subtitle of the third volume itself. (shrink)