Affiliation:
1. Roskilde University, Denmark
Abstract
This article compares the ways in which Michel Foucault’s and Quentin Skinner’s historical analyses seek to unsettle the limits on present forms of freedom. We do so by comparing their ways of analysing discourse, rationality and agency. The two authors differ significantly in the ways they deal with these three phenomena. The most significant difference lies in their ways of addressing agency and its relationship to power. Notwithstanding these differences, the historical analyses of both authors seek to problematize the ways in which past thoughts and practices limit contemporary forms of freedom. While Foucault seems to go furthest in this endeavour, a comparison may enrich both lines of historical analyses.
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,History
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Why More Civil Society Will Not Lead to Less Domination: Dealing with Present Day State Phobia through Michel Foucault and Neo-Republicanism;Journal of Political Power;2021-01-02
2. Freiheit und Institution;Themenschwerpunkt Widerstand, transnational;2020-05-11
3. Freiheit als Kritik;Edition Moderne Postmoderne;2018-05-15
4. Introduction;Pluralist Democracy in International Relations;2018