Foucault's would-be 96th Birthday

It's Foucault's posthumous 96th birthday today (15th October). A French, gay philosopher who, like Arendt (born 20 years earlier than him) was politically active and a philosopher but didn't identify as one. However, if you read his works, you see his continental style of philosophical argumentation. I don't think these two philosophers and their works can classify as non-philosophers because their research methodology doesn't really fit other fields, for instance, they do not carry out case studies with research participants and so on themselves, so neither fit sociology nor psychology, although Foucault did study pure psychology at the University of Paris. He tried to combine the two by embarking on a PhD in the Philosophy of Psychology but gave up after a year, despite already holding an equivalent MA in Philosophy and a second degree (licence) in Psychology. So I don't know what happened there 🤷 but then he did suffer from homophobia all his life, which he found very difficult to cope with, unsurprisingly. Although he eventually received his PhD, he had to go through various rejections before he was finally awarded it, roughly a decade after his MA. However, that didn't stop him working as a researcher and lecturing at universities before he obtained his PhD, despite the overcomplicated European system! 

Before Foucault's first degree in philosophy, he took an interest in the subject at school. Against his father's wishes for him to become a surgeon, he further developed his philosophy in secondary school when he studied with the existentialist, Hegelian teacher and philosopher, Jean Hyppolite (1907-1968) who taught him that philosophy is best understood through history and who also influenced some of his other students, namely Deleuze, Derrida and Balibar. So I'm not sure to what extent Foucault can be considered an historian / historian of ideas because his purpose for and methodology in history was philosophical.

Another big influence in his life was his lecturer Althusser with whom he not only remained friends all his life but also supported and defended against criticisms. 

Foucault is known for his work on power, institutions, politics and aesthetics. He explained his research process to the interviewer Didier Eribon in 1981 as drawing heavily on his life experience and interactions with others, making his works semi-autobiographical. As he noticed issues and problems with the institutions and processes around him, he wrote about them, including in his theoretical philosophy. A great process for generating original ideas and creating philosophical theories and books that speak to us and our lives! I think this also tells us - One: the context of his life story and identity as a gay man is vital to understanding his ideas; Two: it shows that even very hypothetical-looking philosophy is grounded in practical situations, problems and daily life experience.  

He was a public intellectual in much the same way as Arendt, whose birthday is just one day before his. In his statement, published in the French popular press, Libération 1984, Foucault argued for ordinary people to see themselves as international citizens, partly as a result of the establishment of key international organizations such as Amnesty International. He maintains that everyone should act according to their absolute right, duty and obligation to raise their voices in solidarity to shine a light on and condemn abuses of power (political and institutional) irrespective of who the perpetrator or victim is, and call out policies that create suffering and unhappiness. This sentiment and concept is still heard today in political debates in the UK. 

This week on Twitter I've noticed stances from some that attempt to excuse damaging policies as mere collateral damage, are unperturbed that the government repeatedly shirks their responsibilities and some claim it's just part of their job to make decisions for us whether we like the consequences or not. However, many (in the UK and Europe) are pushing back and condemning the unhappiness caused by recent, new and proposed government policies and showing testimonies of individual suffering, arguing in favour of government accountability. So Foucault's statement is as relevant today to public sentiment about society, institutions and politics as it was in France and the UK in the 1980's. 

We are international citizens who need more than just expressing what Foucault calls simple indignation. Everyone has a right to express that indignation verbally too, through talking at length about the impact political decisions are having on their lives and sharing their experiences. We need to ensure our governments do not give themselves the entire platform to speak while silencing and no-platforming their citizens into not speaking and objecting to any governmental actions that do not uphold their political obligation to enhance society's flourishing and happiness. Being elected, according to Foucault, is not the only criteria for voicing dissatisfaction. Our international citizenship is enough for us to assess and voice our beliefs about how well we are being governed and whether our governments, wherever in the world we may live, are keeping to their political obligations to us. Political stability is not a one-way street. And Foucault's statement gives us the vocabulary and concepts to not just feel the indignation, but to express it better in words. 

Don't be afraid to comment below on this blog post, as well as visiting my website for the Foucault Circle I founded, where you can also join my public group space for the circle and ask questions, comment and discuss this further, all available at:

https://creativeapproaches.wixsite.com/foucaultcircle