281 definitions
The book's index
The Chomsky–Foucault Debate
203 concepts · 281 definitions
- 19681
- abduction1
- anarcho-syndicalism1
- anxiety1
- apatheia1
- autopsy1
- balance1
- behavior1
- behavioral science1
- behaviorism2
- Bill of Rights1
- body1
- bolshevism1
- British Museum1
- capitalism1
- censorship2
- Charles Darwin1
- child2
- CIA1
- civil disobedience3
- class struggle2
- clear and present danger1
- coercion1
- COINTELPRO1
- Cold War1
- common sense1
- complexity1
- confession1
- conformity1
- creativity3
- credentials2
- criminal1
- debate1
- decentralization1
- democracy1
- devotion1
- dialectic1
- dictatorship of the proletariat1
- discontinuity1
- discovery1
- discursive regime1
- divergence1
- domination2
- dove1
- draft1
- drudgery1
- dualism1
- education1
- empiricism1
- end of ideology1
- enemies list1
- epistemology1
- event1
- expert1
Power (n.) requires freedom: there is no power without potential refusal or revolt.
Power (n.) is not force: a man chained and beaten is under force; induced to speak when he could have kept silent and died, his freedom has been subjected to power.
Power (n.) is not lodged only in government, police and army; it works through institutions that look independent of it — the family, the university, medicine, psychiatry.
Power (n.) that only said no would never be obeyed; it holds because it also produces — it induces pleasure, forms knowledge, generates discourse.
Human nature (n.) is, like justice and the essence of man, a notion formed within our civilization and class system — so it cannot be used to justify a fight to overthrow that very society.
Human nature (n.) risks, once declared repressed and awaiting liberation, being defined in terms borrowed from our own society and culture.
Human nature (n.) may lie beyond any possible human science — it and the nature of a decent society, the very things we most want to understand.
Human nature (n.) lies under every theory of society: Adam Smith's propensity to truck and barter conveniently fits an idealized early capitalism, while Marx's social cooperation yields a very different picture.
Justice (n.) is, in a Nietzschean view, an invention: put to work in each society either as an instrument of power or as a weapon against it.
Justice (n.) enters social struggle as an instrument of power, not as a hope that merit will someday be rewarded; think of justice in terms of struggle, not struggle in terms of justice.
Justice (n.) functions in a class society as the oppressed class's claim and justification — and a classless society might not need the word at all.
Justice (n.) is, on Foucault's view as Chomsky reads it, a pretext advanced by a class that has or wants power; the revolutionary's task is to win, not to make society more just.
Science (n.) is a kind of biological miracle: that theories our minds can reach should coincide with true ones happened, it seems, in physics and its extensions — perhaps uniquely.
Science (n.) happens by luck: when some aspect of reality happens to match one of the possible structures already in our heads, the two coincide enough for an intelligible science.
Science (n.) sometimes advances by forgetting: whole topics, like the structure of sentences, had to be pretended away for comparative philology to make its great strides.
Science (n.) may draw its constraints not from the human mind but from outside it: from economics, technology, social forms, relations of production, class struggles.
Politics (n.) is not feeding and breeding but weaving, in Plato's Statesman: binding contrary virtues and temperaments with the shuttle of opinion into the finest of fabrics.
Politics (n.) has truth itself as its real question — not error, illusion, alienated consciousness or ideology; hence Nietzsche's importance.
Politics (n.) needs no reason to be interesting; what needs explaining is the blindness, deafness and density of ideology it would take not to care about it.
Politics (n.) is what those who turned universities into instruments of government called the students' attempt to free them from outside control.
Truth (n.) is not the reward of free spirits or the child of long solitude; it is a thing of this world, produced only through multiple constraints, and it induces regular effects of power.
Truth (n.) cannot be freed from every system of power — that is a chimera, for truth is already power — only detached from its present forms of hegemony.
Truth (n.) is produced as an effect within discourses that are in themselves neither true nor false.
Truth (n.) is a system of ordered procedures for producing, regulating, distributing and circulating statements.
Knowledge (n.) is wide only because it is fenced: the scope of what can be known is tied fundamentally to its limits.
Knowledge (n.) and power, in their most complex and sophisticated forms, raise a question Foucault expected never to answer: what have they made of us?
Knowledge (n.) is a collective practice with its own productive power; individuals and their discoveries sit inside rules one can register and describe.
Knowledge (n.) did not grow in Europe so much as transform: plant and animal classification was rewritten by symbolism, natural history, anatomy and evolution, each time into something different.
State (n.) is, from its very first policing project, both individualizing and totalitarian; opposing it with the individual is as hazardous as opposing it with the community.
State (n.) cannot, for all its apparatuses, occupy the whole field of power; it is superstructural, resting on power networks that invest the body, sex, family, knowledge, technology.
State (n.) is sometimes the criminal: when I do what it calls illegal, I often regard my act as legal and the state as the lawbreaker.
State (n.) must, under reason of state, hold out for indefinite historical time against rivals who also grow — and a state that merely held on would come to disaster.
History (n.) has the form of a war rather than a language: relations of power, not relations of meaning.
History (n.) has no meaning, yet it is not absurd: it is intelligible down to the smallest detail, the way struggles, strategies and tactics are.
History (n.) can be read like an art lover reads it rather than an antiquarian: looking for what is valuable in the past partly because of where you stand.
Police (n.) once embraced everything — 'its true object is man': living, active, productive man, his property, trade, illnesses and accidents.
Police (n.) was meant to give people a little extra life, and so give the state a little extra strength, by controlling their common activities.
Police (n.) was, for seventeenth-century authors, not an institution inside the state but a whole governmental technology — the domains, techniques and targets where the state intervenes.