Symposium 25th anniversary issue, Ed.: Lorraine Markotic, Vol. 26, No. 1-2, 2022, pp. 12-36., 2022
Résumé : L’article s’intéresse à la réception nord-américaine de Folie et déraison de Foucault. A... more Résumé : L’article s’intéresse à la réception nord-américaine de Folie et déraison de Foucault. Après avoir montré comment les conceptions américaines du contrôle social ont facilité l’intégration de la pensée foucaldienne dans les milieux universitaires nord-américains, nous examinerons les façons dont les tenants de l’antipsychiatrie et les historiens de la psychiatrie ont reçu Folie et déraison qui deviendra emblématique de la French Theory. Nous présenterons ensuite différentes critiques anglo-américaines de Folie et déraison avant de soutenir la persistance d’un «esprit foucaldien» contre la scientifisation de la psychiatrie. Tout ceci permettra de mesurer l’héritage de Folie et déraison dans les débats en Amérique du Nord.
Abstract : This article aims at understanding the North-American reception of Foucault’s Folie et déraison. After showing how the American conceptions of social control facilitated the integration of the Foucauldian thinking in the North-American academia, I examine the ways by which the advocates of anti-psychiatry and the historians of psychiatry read Folie et déraison, which became emblematic for the French Theory. I then present various Anglo-American critiques of Folie et déraison and defend the persistence of a “Foucauldian spirit” against the scientifization of psychiatry. All this allows to assess the legacy of Folie et déraison in the North American debates.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Books by Alain Beaulieu
//A. Beaulieu, Gilles Deleuze et ses contemporains, Paris, Harmattan, Collection «Ouverture philosophique», 2011, 233 p.
//A. Beaulieu, Gilles Deleuze et la phénoménologie, Presses Universitaires du Septentrion, Lille, 2001. Deuxième édition revue et augmentée parue en coédition chez Sils Maria/Librairie philosophique J. Vrin, Mons/Paris, Collection «De nouvelles possibilités d'existence», 2004, 282 pages ; 2e édition 2006.
Papers by Alain Beaulieu
Abstract : This article aims at understanding the North-American reception of Foucault’s Folie et déraison. After showing how the American conceptions of social control facilitated the integration of the Foucauldian thinking in the North-American academia, I examine the ways by which the advocates of anti-psychiatry and the historians of psychiatry read Folie et déraison, which became emblematic for the French Theory. I then present various Anglo-American critiques of Folie et déraison and defend the persistence of a “Foucauldian spirit” against the scientifization of psychiatry. All this allows to assess the legacy of Folie et déraison in the North American debates.
The posthuman condition, therefore, finds a cosmological resonance, and this chapter intends to study this condition by exploring Husserl’s and Deleuze’s take on several cosmological issues. More precisely, this study explores Husserl’s geostatic earth and Deleuze’s geodynamic earth in order to elucidate the similarities and differences between both philosophers’ reformations of the traditional speculative and transcendent cosmologies in favour of an immanent experience of the earth. The chapter begins with a discussion of Husserl’s conception of the ‘Ark-Earth’ and segues to a presentation of Deleuze’s ‘cosmic earth’. This serves as the foundation for my analysis of Deleuze’s critique of Husserl’s earth, which the former rather briefly formulated at the beginning of the chapter ‘Geophilosophy’ in What Is Philosophy?
was initially presented, may have a cosmological resonance. No doubt,
it is a perspective I adopt in the present analysis of Gilles Deleuze’s and
Edmund Husserl’s cosmologies, and, more precisely, of their respective
conceptions of the earth: a geostatic earth for Husserl and a geodynamic
one for Deleuze and Félix Guattari. Husserl’s essay “The Earth Does Not
Move” (also known as the Umsturz Fragment, written in 1934) as well
as Deleuze and Guattari’s seminal A Thousand Plateaus and What Is
Philosophy? serve as the foundation of my analysis.
This chapter is a response to the relative silence in the secondary literature
with respect to Deleuze and cosmology. It elaborates Deleuze and
Guattari’s critique of Husserl’s conception of the earth, written perhaps
cursorily at the beginning of the chapter “Geophilosophy” in What Is
Philosophy?, and delineates the political implications of this critique.
exclusion of various evolutionary doctrines by Whitehead (emergent, cosmologic and mutationist theory of evolution). We will then show how Gilles Deleuze’s principle of intensive individuation and Francisco Varela’s autopoietic systems are following in Whitehead’s footsteps by conceiving a non-progressive and multi-serial process of becoming for living units situated in a chaosmic or semi-organized universe.
//A. Beaulieu, Gilles Deleuze et ses contemporains, Paris, Harmattan, Collection «Ouverture philosophique», 2011, 233 p.
//A. Beaulieu, Gilles Deleuze et la phénoménologie, Presses Universitaires du Septentrion, Lille, 2001. Deuxième édition revue et augmentée parue en coédition chez Sils Maria/Librairie philosophique J. Vrin, Mons/Paris, Collection «De nouvelles possibilités d'existence», 2004, 282 pages ; 2e édition 2006.
Abstract : This article aims at understanding the North-American reception of Foucault’s Folie et déraison. After showing how the American conceptions of social control facilitated the integration of the Foucauldian thinking in the North-American academia, I examine the ways by which the advocates of anti-psychiatry and the historians of psychiatry read Folie et déraison, which became emblematic for the French Theory. I then present various Anglo-American critiques of Folie et déraison and defend the persistence of a “Foucauldian spirit” against the scientifization of psychiatry. All this allows to assess the legacy of Folie et déraison in the North American debates.
The posthuman condition, therefore, finds a cosmological resonance, and this chapter intends to study this condition by exploring Husserl’s and Deleuze’s take on several cosmological issues. More precisely, this study explores Husserl’s geostatic earth and Deleuze’s geodynamic earth in order to elucidate the similarities and differences between both philosophers’ reformations of the traditional speculative and transcendent cosmologies in favour of an immanent experience of the earth. The chapter begins with a discussion of Husserl’s conception of the ‘Ark-Earth’ and segues to a presentation of Deleuze’s ‘cosmic earth’. This serves as the foundation for my analysis of Deleuze’s critique of Husserl’s earth, which the former rather briefly formulated at the beginning of the chapter ‘Geophilosophy’ in What Is Philosophy?
was initially presented, may have a cosmological resonance. No doubt,
it is a perspective I adopt in the present analysis of Gilles Deleuze’s and
Edmund Husserl’s cosmologies, and, more precisely, of their respective
conceptions of the earth: a geostatic earth for Husserl and a geodynamic
one for Deleuze and Félix Guattari. Husserl’s essay “The Earth Does Not
Move” (also known as the Umsturz Fragment, written in 1934) as well
as Deleuze and Guattari’s seminal A Thousand Plateaus and What Is
Philosophy? serve as the foundation of my analysis.
This chapter is a response to the relative silence in the secondary literature
with respect to Deleuze and cosmology. It elaborates Deleuze and
Guattari’s critique of Husserl’s conception of the earth, written perhaps
cursorily at the beginning of the chapter “Geophilosophy” in What Is
Philosophy?, and delineates the political implications of this critique.
exclusion of various evolutionary doctrines by Whitehead (emergent, cosmologic and mutationist theory of evolution). We will then show how Gilles Deleuze’s principle of intensive individuation and Francisco Varela’s autopoietic systems are following in Whitehead’s footsteps by conceiving a non-progressive and multi-serial process of becoming for living units situated in a chaosmic or semi-organized universe.
Sus monografías sobre autores han adquirido sin embargo el estatus de "clásicos" de la filosofía. Deleuze, además, toma posición, a su manera, en los grandes debates de su tiempo (giro lingüístico, críticas al historicismo y a las filosofías de la consciencia, freudomarxismo, pensamiento de la diferencia y del acontecimiento, teoría del sentido y de la significación, etc.) ubicando su trabajo en la corriente de la metafísica occidental. De aquí la necesidad de interrogar la herencia filosófica de Deleuze, diez años después de la desaparicion del autor.
Las contribuciones reunidas aquí abren nuevas pistas estudiando las relaciones complejas de Deleuze con nuestra tradición y recusando también toda tentativa de reducción del pensamiento deleuziano a un simple momento histórico.
Con contribuciones de Manola Antonioli, Alain Beaulieu, Constantin Boundas, Olivier Fahle, Stéfan Leclercq y Arnaud Villani y una introducción de Axel Cherniavsky.
Résumé: Un nombre important d'hommages et de In memoriam ont parus suite à la mort de Gilles Deleuze et dans les années qui l'ont suivie. Toutefois, aucun n'a pleinement saisi le caractère événementiel de cette mort. Dans un premier temps, une série d'erreurs dans la littérature entourant la mort de Deleuze sera identifiée. Il s'agira ensuite d'indiquer comment les dépasser en considérant la rencontre entre la traversée du miroir par Alice et la défenestration de Deleuze, les deux ayant eu lieu un 4 novembre. Nous soutiendrons, en outre, qu'un nouveau concept de mort a été créé par cette rencontre qui a jusqu'ici passée sous le radar des commentateurs.
https://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/foucault-studies/article/view/3894/4239