Relationality, polemics, incommensurability: thinking the political at the intersections of the work of Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault
Publisher
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
This thesis is focused on the intersections of ontology and politics in the work of Michel
Foucault and Jacques Derrida. In particular it concerns the ways in which these two thinkers
offer accounts of (ethical, social, political) relations which exceed a traditional dichotomy
between transcendentalism and empiricism. Both Derrida and Foucault show universal
foundations to originate in an anterior play of differences 'between' the transcendental and
empirical. However, as this thesis shows, each thinks this anterior 'medium' of relations in
radically incommensurable ways: as differance or aporia in Derrida and as power and
problematization in Foucault. As such, each necessarily views the other as failing to account
for the ‘true medium’ of relationality and so of its violent effacement and disavowal. This
incommensurability, it is argued, results in a polemic between them which is explicit in their
competing accounts of Descartes’ Meditations and implicit throughout all of their work. This
thesis traces the polemic between Derrida and Foucault across their accounts of subjectivity,
ethics and politics. It is argued that in their engagements with each of these fields they
employ parallel politicizing strategies which are nevertheless wholly exclusive of one another.
The incommensurability between Derrida and Foucault reflects a broader problematic
which any political thought affirming its own finitude cannot explicitly recognize. Postfoundational
accounts of relationality, it is claimed, violently exclude competing
philosophical strategies without the capacity of accounting for this exclusion.
Authors
Rekret, PaulCollections
- Theses [3834]