Rating: 
Summary: Dangerous Minds
Review: Granted, Foucault makes important assertions that show ways in which being sane is defined by institutions and cultural assumptions. The problem is that this book is used as a defense of irrationality and as a cornerstone for critiques of reasoned argumentation and postmodernist discourse that challenges the validity of scientific thinking and rational argument. The modes of discourse associated with this author-function open the door for a dangerous and romanticized view of the reality of mental illness. For this, I must critique the author-function Foucault -- AND Foucault, himself does assert the independent author is merely a "function" or mode of discourse. This book is dangerous when fed to impressionable minds struggling with the necessity to learn to think accurately and clearly. Foucault wanted to subvert and transgress the bounds of the established social order -- I don't think he realized how dangerous some of these trangressions can be. If, however, he did realize it, then Foucault was not merely a playful "author-function" but a truly evil human being: an assertion that seems plausible when one reads about his personal life.
Rating: 
Summary: A SANE VIEW OF INSANITY
Review: I read this book for a graduate class in psychotherapy. Given the choice of Foucault's history versus books on various theoretical perspectives on psychology and psychiatry, chosing this book was a no-brainer. Reading it, however, did take some brains, but it was worth the effort. The first chapter is especially delightful. Its focuses on the time period from the end of the Middle Ages and into the Rennaisannce. Foucault gives many specific and poignant examples of how the changing view of insanity was intertwined with the changing concepts of God and humanity. I especially enjoyed the descriptions of the "Ship of Fools" and the extensive and elevative literary treatment of Folly during the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. I would recommend this book to anyone in the mental health professions or to people of reason everywhere.
Rating: 
Summary: If you are not philosophical, DO NOT READ...
Review: I read this book for a philosophy of history class as a student at college. If you do not like philosophy and are easily distracted when reading mind-numbing abstractions then do not pick up this book. The thesis, or point, of the chapters are convoluted and seem to meander everywhere. I could read a chapter twice and still not have a clue what the author was saying. I can't comment on how persuasive his arguements are because I'm still not sure what he is saying. If you like philosophy then this book is for you becuase the author launches off into a universe of abstractions and shades that make one go insane, thus the title of his book.
Rating: 
Summary: category mistakes
Review: Immensely popular and influential among left-wing American cultural critics, this book has been critiqued ravishly by French psychologists. The gist of their critique is that the book represents more of the values and concerns of Foucault rather than an accurate and responsible history of mental illness. Foucault's central argument that society defines sane and insane behavior is an old cliche in cultural anthropology. Furthermore, recent advances in cognitive science and psychiatry challenge Foucault's position by affirming that mental illness is exactly that, namely, "an illness." Simply stated, there is so much cross-cultural evidence that certain psychiatric disorders are univeral and not, therefore, specific to cultures but biologically grounded. Various mental illnesses have been verified biologically as illnesses in the same way that biologically illnesses are also recognizable as physical illnesses. Foucault is sometimes touted as a "cutting-edge" thinker, but his ideas were dated before he wrote them down. Erving Goffman's book "Asylums" is an earlier and far better treatment of the cultural dynamics of mental institutions, and Ruth Benedict argued (in 1930) that insanity is often a cultural construct rather than a physical malady. The basics of Foucault's ideas can also be seen in the writing of Shakespeare, Cervantes, Montaigne, and other Renaissance writers--about 400 years ago. The moral dimensions of Foucault's fraud are only now being explored, and this writer's currently trendy reputation is not likely to stand the test of time. This book is a good example of ways in which trendy writing and intellectual fads can quickly be discovered to be mere cliches. Intellectual dubiousness aside, the major problems with this tome deal with Foucault's romanticization of mental illness. In placing "insanity" in quotes, Foucault is arguing that it is one more mental condition -- no better nor worse than sanity. This view is intellectually suspect, at best, and downright dangerous at worst. It seems that Foucault is writing to shock and self-aggrandize his own self. This shouldn't be surprising when even a cursory read of his biography reveals that Foucault had all sorts of loathsome predilections, including praise for Mao, Stalin, and Khomeni as well as stated opposition to age of consent laws and support for eugenics, not to mention his passionate involvement in S&M and LSD trips.
Rating: 
Summary: Revising Foucaultian Revisionism
Review: Immensely popular and influential among left-wing American cultural critics, this book has been critiqued ravishly by French psychologists. The gist of their critique is that the book represents more of the values and concerns of Foucault rather than an accurate and responsible history of mental illness. Foucault's central argument that society defines sane and insane behavior is an old cliche in cultural anthropology. Furthermore, recent advances in cognitive science and psychiatry challenge Foucault's position by affirming that mental illness is exactly that, namely, "an illness." Simply stated, there is so much cross-cultural evidence that certain psychiatric disorders are univeral and not, therefore, specific to cultures but biologically grounded. Various mental illnesses have been verified biologically as illnesses in the same way that biologically illnesses are also recognizable as physical illnesses. Foucault is sometimes touted as a "cutting-edge" thinker, but his ideas were dated before he wrote them down. Erving Goffman's book "Asylums" is an earlier and far better treatment of the cultural dynamics of mental institutions, and Ruth Benedict argued (in 1930) that insanity is often a cultural construct rather than a physical malady. The basics of Foucault's ideas can also be seen in the writing of Shakespeare, Cervantes, Montaigne, and other Renaissance writers--about 400 years ago. The moral dimensions of Foucault's fraud are only now being explored, and this writer's currently trendy reputation is not likely to stand the test of time. This book is a good example of ways in which trendy writing and intellectual fads can quickly be discovered to be mere cliches. Intellectual dubiousness aside, the major problems with this tome deal with Foucault's romanticization of mental illness. In placing "insanity" in quotes, Foucault is arguing that it is one more mental condition -- no better nor worse than sanity. This view is intellectually suspect, at best, and downright dangerous at worst. It seems that Foucault is writing to shock and self-aggrandize his own self. This shouldn't be surprising when even a cursory read of his biography reveals that Foucault had all sorts of loathsome predilections, including praise for Mao, Stalin, and Khomeni as well as stated opposition to age of consent laws and support for eugenics, not to mention his passionate involvement in S&M and LSD trips.
Rating:
Summary: A poetic historical tour de force redefining reason
Review: Madness and civilization is a powerful survey on the historical development of what we call madness today. What the term means today is radically different from what it meant during the age of reason. This book takes a more or less chronological approach to the development of madness. What is most important is it shows how the term mad was manipulated throughout history in order for society to redefine itself against "the other." This book makes a good case as to why we still live under the shadow of Freud, as Foucault credits him with defining the relationship of the clinically insane, and the physician. A must read to understand the current definition seperating the sane and the insane.
Rating:
Summary: It's (almost) all about Foucault...
Review: Much is made about the French post-structralists and their attempt to bring about hospitality in our ethics. While this book does not explicitly call for such action it is clearly in that vein. Taking the approach of a genealogy, in the tradition of Nietzsche, Foucault traces the way civilizations have dealt with madness since the middle ages. What we discover is a group of people marginalized and imprisoned for the sake of comfort for those who are "normal." A very important book since we are still dealing with a politic which pushes different people to the edge of society in order for those in the mainstream to feel secure. Foucault, while adding commentary and a definite movement, does not form your opinion. If you are looking for leading go read another book, but if you are looking for conversation and a bit of enlightenment on the subject of madness a definite read. Foucault, while adding commentary and a definate movement, does not form your opinion. If you are looking for leading go read another book, but if you are looking for conversation and a bit of enlightenment on the subject of madness a definate read.
Rating:
Summary: A model for an ethic of difference.
Review: Much is made about the French post-structralists and their attempt to bring about hospitality in our ethics. While this book does not explicitly call for such action it is clearly in that vein. Taking the approach of a genealogy, in the tradition of Nietzsche, Foucault traces the way civilizations have dealt with madness since the middle ages. What we discover is a group of people marginalized and imprisoned for the sake of comfort for those who are "normal." A very important book since we are still dealing with a politic which pushes different people to the edge of society in order for those in the mainstream to feel secure. Foucault, while adding commentary and a definite movement, does not form your opinion. If you are looking for leading go read another book, but if you are looking for conversation and a bit of enlightenment on the subject of madness a definite read. Foucault, while adding commentary and a definate movement, does not form your opinion. If you are looking for leading go read another book, but if you are looking for conversation and a bit of enlightenment on the subject of madness a definate read.
Rating:
Summary: The Beginnings of Foucault's Philosophies
Review: One of Foucault's major works, this was the first book which began the corpus of works for which Foucault is remembered. Beyond a simple history, it provides insight into how we objectify a subject, constructing an "other" than ourselves.
Rating:
Summary: To write the "History of Madness" is to be mad itself
Review: The book became the leading voice of the anti-bourgeoisie hegemony in the times of Foucault. It was almost a bible for some those who styled their lives with regard to the story of Pierre Riviera who murdered his mother, brother and sister. It became the voice of the underground socialist intellectuals. It was a tool of the left-wing. The psychiatric establishment of the time attacked Foucault with most harsh diatribe. Trueman Myaka Tel:(031) 3036466
|
