STS 6534: Reading Foucault: April 19, The Hermeneutics of the subject, Hyunkyoung Cho

STS 6534: Reading Foucault: April 19, The Hermeneutics of the subject, Hyunkyoung Cho

The Hermeneutics of the Subject (seventeen-twenty, pp.331-411)

After mathēsis, askēsis. the problem of knowledge of the world, of the exercise of the self).

“askēsis,” ascesis ; an exercise of the self on the activity of thought

Edward F. McGushin, Foucault’s Askēsis.


Seventeen 3 March 1982, first hour
The subjectivation of true discourse, Making the truth your own, Becoming the subject of enunciation of true discourse.

Listening’s the fundamental ambiguity: pathētikos and logikos (passive/sensitive and reasonable/rational sense that can receive the logos)

Listening can not be defined as a tekhnē (rests on and implies knowledge-knowledge of what the body is in its very reality)

The active and meaningful silence purifies logical listening in the practice of the self.


Eighteen 3 March 1982 , second hour
Reading involves providing an opportunity for meditation (the Latin word meditatio translates the Greek substantive meletē, the Greek verb meletan).

Descartes’s meditation is the usual skeptical exercise. “Descartes is not thinking about everything in the world that could be doubtful. Neither is he thinking about what could not be doubted.” The subject is a matter of not putting, but building.

Reading collects orationes, logoi (discourses, element of discourse); the flexible exchange of soul services to the other in his journey towards the good and towards himself. A spiritual correspondence;. the advice you give to the other is equally given to yourself. The care of oneself and the care of others.

Speaking; How to tell the truth, the key is parrēsia as libertas; The problem of existence and juxtaposition of Dianoia kai parrhēsia: the thought, the content of thought in his discourse and his free speech.

The parrhēsia is within the space of the division and conflict of philosophy and rhetoric.


nineteen 10 March 1982
As the technique and ethics of the communication of true discourse, parrhesia is “franc-parler” (speaking freely).

Two adversaries of the master’s parrhesia are flattery and rhetoric.
The flattery is a moral adversary, and the rhetoric is a technical adversary.

The flattery was paired with the anger. The difference between power and property is this: Property is the jus utendi et abutendi. A jus utendi must be defined with regard to power that will allow the abuse of power without its abuse.

The parrhēsia’s the other adversary, partner is rhetoric.
As a tactical situation, a game of subject matter, the essence of parrhēsia is the kairos, the occasion, the situation, the moment chosen for say this truth.


twenty 10 March 1982
To overcome the conflict between philosophy and rhetoric.

Seneca’s text; let us say what we think and think what we say; let speech harmonize with conduct.

The basis of parrhēsia is the adoequatio between the subject who speaks, and who speaks the truth, and the subject who conducts himself as this truth requires.

The psychagogical transmission of a truth is to modify the mode of being of the subject to whom we address ourselves. From Ancient psychagogy, paideia, the The pedagogy is that “This truth I tell you, you see it in me.”