Read Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason by Michel Foucault Richard Howard José Teixeira Coelho Netto Online

madness-and-civilization-a-history-of-insanity-in-the-age-of-reason

Librarian note: an alternate cover for this edition can be found here.Michel Foucault examines the archeology of madness in the West from 1500 to 1800 – from the late Middle Ages, when insanity was still considered part of everyday life and fools and lunatics walked the streets freely, to the time when such people began to be considered a threat, asylums were first built,Librarian note: an alternate cover for this edition can be found here.Michel Foucault examines the archeology of madness in the West from 1500 to 1800 – from the late Middle Ages, when insanity was still considered part of everyday life and fools and lunatics walked the streets freely, to the time when such people began to be considered a threat, asylums were first built, and walls were erected between the “insane” and the rest of humanity....

Title : Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780679721109
Format Type : Paperback
Number of Pages : 320 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason Reviews

  • Foad
    2019-02-19 11:37

    میشل فوکو در کتاب «تاریخ جنون» توضیح می‌دهد که جنون در قرون وسطا و رنسانس، بر خلاف امروز، یک اختلال روانی و عصبی تلقی نمی‌شد. مردم آن دوره دیوانه‌ها را بیمار نمی‌دانستند. برعکس، جنون از دید مردم آن دوران، نوعی فرا-عقل بود. دیوانه کسی بود که پرده از برابر چشم‌هایش کنار رفته بود و می‌توانست چهره حقیقی جهان را ببیند، شبیه یک عارف، با این تفاوت که آن چهره‌ای که دیوانه می‌دید، آن باطنی که شهود می‌کرد، آن‌قدر وحشت‌انگیز بود که باعث می‌شد حرف‌های به ظاهر نامفهوم بزند، خوی وحشیانه پیدا کند، بی‌دلیل نعره بکشد یا سرش را به دیوار بکوبد و به خودش و دیگران آسیب بزند. همۀ این رفتارها آن‌قدرها هم نامعقول نیست وقتی بدانیم فرد تمام مدت خودش را در حضور چه حقیقتی می‌بیند.مردم آن دوران معتقد بودند عاقل‌ها به اختیار خودشان است که پا به اقلیم فرا-عقل جنون نمی‌گذارند، به اختیار خودشان است که فقط از گوشۀ چشم به جهان نگاه می‌کنند و از دیدن چهرۀ حقیقی جهان اجتناب می‌کنند. و اگر جلوی خودشان را نگیرند، اسیر وسوسۀ نگاه کردن می‌شوند، و آن وقت یک نگاه کافی است که پا به مسیر بدون برگشت جنون بگذارند.امروز جهان علم به این حرف‌ها می‌خندد، و به جای کلمه «جنون» از «اختلال» یا کلمات مشابه علمی و بدون بار احساسی استفاده می‌کند. امروز جهان علم انواع و اقسام جنون را طبقه‌بندی کرده و با هر کدام از آن‌ها به تناسب نوع اختلالی که در سیستم عصبی‌شان رخ داده رفتار می‌کند، گاهی دارو، گاهی شوک الکتریکی، گاهی گروه‌درمانی و...امروز کسی به «چهرۀ وحشت‌انگیز جهان» باور ندارد.اما وقتی شب می‌رسد و هر کس به گوشۀ تنهای خودش می‌خزد، و در سکوت با خودش فکر می‌کند، می‌تواند شبحی تار از چهره‌ای هولناک را ببیند که از دل تاریکی به او خیره شده، و فوری باید دست به دامان گوشی همراه و شبکه‌های اجتماعی شود تا جلوی خودش را بگیرد، مبادا اسیر وسوسه شود و مستقیم به آن نگاه کند...

  • Sawsan
    2019-03-18 13:12

    عمل متقن يتتبع فيه ميشيل فوكو تاريخ الجنون في العصر الكلاسيكي, عصر الاتجاه إلى العقلانية ينقد تعالي العقلانية على الجنون واللاعقل وعلى كل أشكال الاختلاف كالحماقة والتخلف والاكتئاب والاضطراب النفسي وغيرها... وعدم الاهتمام بالفصل بينهم والأخطر هو اعتبار الجنون كل مالاينتمي للعقل بحسب السلطة في ذلك الوقت سواء طبية, اجتماعية, أو دينيةيصنف أشكال الجنون والعلاج, ويعرض تحليل للمفاهيم وأساليب التفكير وتطور الوعي الفكري والطبيومع وجود الاختلافات في التفكير والدوافع والجوانب العقلية والنفسية نجد البعض ممن قدموا أعمال قيمة للبشرية في الفكر والفلسفة والشعر والفن كانوا لاعقليين ولو لفترة من حياتهم فوكو يخرج بالجنون من المعنى الضيق ويكتب عنه بالتفاصيل ضمن صورة للحياة والمجتمع

  • Foad
    2019-03-15 15:32

    ماركس و اقتصادماركس در نظريه‌ خود كه ديد ما را نسبت به جهان متحول كرد، ادعايى مهم دارد: علم، فرهنگ، فلسفه، دين، اخلاق، ادبيات و... امور ثابت و مستقلى نيستند، بلكه اين ها همه جنبه‌های روبنایی و ظاهرى جوامع بشری هستند. در زیر این پوسته‌ی ظاهری، اقتصاد و شكل‌های تولید اقتصادی قرار دارند. وقتى در جامعه‌اى شكل تولید غالب تغيير كند، علم‌، فلسفه‌، دين‌، اخلاقيات‌، و طرز نگاه‌ آن جامعه به جهان نيز به تناسب آن شكل جديد توليد تغيير مى‌كند. زمين-مركزى بودن يا خورشيد-مركزى بودن (كه هر دو به يك اندازه اشتباهند) فقط دو نظريه‌ى علمى محض نبودند، بلكه ريشه در دو ساختار اقتصادى مختلف داشتند. با تغيير ساختار اقتصادى، نگاه به انسان تغيير كرد، و با تغيير نگاه به انسان و از بين رفتن مركزيتش در جهان، مركزيت زمين هم از بين رفت. همين طور دين، فلسفه و اخلاقيات يک جامعه، همه وابسته به اقتصاد است.فوكو و قدرتفوكو به عنوان يه ماركسيست - يا ماركسيست سابق - اين ايده‌ى ماركس را مى‌گيرد، و با تغيير مختصرى به نظريه‌ى كليدى خودش تبديل مى‌كند. فوكو با الهام از نيچه می‌گويد آن چيزى كه زيربناست و تمام امور انسانى به آن وابسته است، نه اقتصاد، بلكه ساختار قدرت است. ساختار قدرت است كه علم، دين، فلسفه، جهان بينى، اخلاقيات و فرهنگ ما را مى‌سازد.در همين راستا، فوكو در كتاب‌هاى مختلف خود بيمارستان، تيمارستان، زندان و جنسيت را بررسى می‌کند تا نشان دهد چطور شكل فعلى اين نهادها، و تلقى ما از مفاهیم "جنون" و "بيمارى" و "جرم" و "جنسيت"، و حتى پديد آمدن علوم پزشكى و روانشناسی و حقوق، قبل از هر چيز وابسته به شكل ساختارهاى قدرت زمان خود بودند.تاريخ جنونكتاب "تاريخ جنون" با ارائه‌ی شواهد و اسناد جزئی فراوان و تحلیل‌های خیره کننده، سیر شکل گرفتن آسایشگاه روانی در فرانسه و باقی کشورهای اروپایی از قرون وسطا تا قرن نوزدهم را مورد بررسی قرار می‌‌دهد، و شرح می‌دهد که چطور این سیر، باعث شد مفهوم امروزی "دیوانه" شکل بگیرد و راه برای ایجاد علمی جداگانه به نام "روانشناسی" در قرن نوزدهم باز شود. فوكو از دوران جنگ‌هاى صليبى كه جذام در اروپا شيوع پيدا كرده بود شروع می‌كند و نشان می‌دهد از آن زمان با تأسيس جذامخانه‌ها سنت محبوس كردن مردم غيرمجرم شروع شد، و كم كم با ريشه كن شدن جذام بعد از اتمام جنگ‌هاى صليبى، جذامخانه‌هاى اينك خالى شده، تغيير كاربرى دادند و افراد بى كار و فقير - از جمله ديوانه‌ها - در آن‌ها محبوس شدند تا مانع فعاليت اقتصادى نباشند. اما بعد با تغيير شكل ساختار و نظريات اقتصادى، از افراد بى كار و فقير براى كارهاى اجبارى استفاده شد، اما چون ديوانه‌ها به درد كار نمى‌خوردند در محبس باقى ماندند، و به اين ترتيب براى اولين بار ديوانه به عنوان تنها موجودى كه بايد در حبس بماند شناخته شد: نه به خاطر خطراتش بلكه تنها چون فايده‌اى اقتصادى نداشت، بر خلاف باقى فقرا و بى خانمان‌ها. اما علت اين حبس كم كم فراموش شد، و حبس شدن ديوانه به امرى ضرورى بدل گشت، و در پى آن ديوانه خانه هايى مستقل تأسيس شدند تا اين سنت قديمى را كه علت اوليه اش فراموش شده بود، زنده نگه دارند.اين فقط شماى كلى و بسيار ناقصى از كتاب بود. كتاب حرف‌هاى بسيار بيشترى دارد، كه بعضى‌ها را در آپديت‌ها نوشتم.

  • AC
    2019-03-14 15:18

    UPDATE:I realize now (as I read Dreyfus and Rabinow) that I completely misread this book. I read it too quickly, and the book is maddeningly eccentric and so difficult to comprehend. Further, I read it without sufficient context either of this book itself, or of Foucault's corpus, or of the philosophical background in which or against which MF is operating. The problem is intensified by the fact that Foucault is one of those thinkers who changed his mind extensively from first to last on important matters, and therefore the philosophy of this early work is theoretically incomplete and does not fully know where it will end up by the end of MF's life. Add to that that there are out-and-out absurdities of method (his historical method) and metaphysical positions that are ridiculous that are both implicit (or explicit) within structures and ideas that are nonetheless profound and of great signficance, with the result that the naive reader (which I am -- especially given how little I know about Continental thought) can hardly disengage and disentangle or, consequently, even read the book at hand with sufficient clarity to get it in any focus.People assume that the way to read a philosopher is simply to jump in and read the text. This, in my experience, is usually a great mistake. While one cannot understand the expository literature without familiarity with the text, one cannot often really understand the text without the help and guidance of those "who have gone down this path before" -- whether teachers or books. Thus, a good grounding in good secondary literature is often essential to even being able to begin read the texts with any understanding -- especially if the material is fundamentally foreign to one's way of thinking or intellectual experiences -- postwar thought for me; classical (ancient Greek) thought for others.This is not true for all thinkers -- some can be read and the secondary literature simply debases them. But it is true for many, and seems (for me) to be true for Postmodernism.At any rate -- this should be re-rated. Either to five, or maybe to something else. Whatever...One last point - regarding MF's Archaeology and the general claim that all knowledge or discourse is mediated (or indeed, conditioned) by assumptions that cannot be accessed -- that is, on the postmodern claims of the relatively of all knowledge or discourse.If one has to carve up a turkey, or pull apart a car engine -- or, to maintain the analogy, draw a diagram (a discourse) of the skeleton or the engine to be carved or taken apart -- will this diagram be contaminated by 'theory'? or deep structures? And why not?For the simple reason that the reality has, at least at the given level, a real structure to it - and it is this real structure that justifies and makes possible analysis -- as a neutral procedure. Thus, for Plato, it is the reality of the theory of Ideas that makes the dialectic and diaeresis possible and effective -- and not the dialectic that "proves" that the Ideas exist. Without the underlying structural realities, the procedures would run into contradictions at every turn, and that they do not in fact do so is proof, by a reductio ad absurdum, of the reality of the Ideas.Provisionally, of course... One last point -- about Kuhn's treatment of Aristotle's Physics - which Dreyfus and Rabinow discuss --. Much of what seems "strange" in Aristotle's Physics can be explained simply by two assumptions that were clearly false: He assumes, in cosmogony, that the earth is at the center of the universe, and had to adjust his mathematics to this assumption. The best book on this, apart of course, from Neugebauer's Exact Sciences in Antiquity, is D.R Dicks, Early Greek Astronomy; and because he assumes that rest is the natural state of a body: See Henri Carteron, La notion De Force Dans Le Systeme d'Aristote.ORIGINAL REVIEW:What can one say – how can one rate – a work like this? Certainly, Foucault is a genius… there are portions of this work that are sheer poetry. Yet much of it is errant nonsense – it’s method is completely absurd and fraudulant – yet there lurk beneath the method and the errant – certain deep intuitions – hurled at the reader – hurled at the void – in ways calculated to undermine their seriousness by overvaluing their meaning by… you see, the recursive loop here…?Rated as philosophy or as poetry, this would receive 5-stars – for its originality, if nothing else. And for its inevitable working out of the modern and postmodern logic of self-annihiliation.... As a work of scholarship or history or, indeed, in its method, it receives one-star. For its influence, which has been baleful – both morally and in the Academy – one star – for it’s flash in the night of a despair that Foucault himself was moving to resolve – had he lived, he’d have ended up perhaps a Platonist… well, there was an evolution of Foucault, no question… 5-stars.So I’ll give this review just one star, so as to jar the reader. Foucault would approve.

  • David Schaafsma
    2019-03-21 14:31

    Some of what we read here has become commonplace in the world of ideas, but this is where it started for many thinkers of the twentieth century. In this volume Foucault illustrates how notions like madness are socially and culturally constructed in any given age and place. The criteria for madness are made up, by us, they in part invented for particular social and political purposes. Leper colonies housed/confined/kept from society those with this disease, and when leprosy largely died out there were these places of confinement we could use for the poor, criminals, and anyone we didn't like, and this is what we do today, though our ideas about madness--what it is and how to treat it, how to exclude those that have it in various ways--are changing constantly. Foucault goes on to write what he calls "archeaologies" of other disciplines and institutions, but he begins here. This was his dissertation, or a version of it, written on the basis of his study in a variety of clinics, his study of philosophy and psychology, and his own experience with therapy. It's his first big book, maybe his masterpiece. There are books on the history of madness, done in sort of chronological fashion, getting to some sort of accumulative notion of what it is. This is how arguments are usually made since the Enlightenment, according to the rules of Reason. But Foucault isn't trying to write in this fashion, he has in mind exploring the varieties of madness (as with William James, not what religion is, but The Varieties of Religious experience), showing how madness is depicted in art in various periods, in the Renaissance for instance as a part of the world, as a source (sometimes) of insight and wisdom and difference and mystical or just creative vision, then shifting dramatically in the classical period to horror, to something we need to fear and confine. As I said, in the forty years since it was written, ideas of the social construction of reality have become sort of now commonplace, but it was groundbreaking then, work from one of the 2 or 3 greatest thinkers of the twentieth century, maybe, from someone who may have begun this journey in the late forties when he was taken by his parents to a therapist who suggested a "cure" for his being gay (something that was indeed considered a disorder by psychiatry until relatively recently, though as we know, some people in the world still think it is something one can "cure").Madness & Civ. is also a work contending with the universalist assumptions of Grand Theory (such as psychoanalysis or Marxism) as One Central theory for understanding How the World Works. Later, he would himself explore the structures and language (or discourse) of institutions and disciplines to see the pervasive presence of Power operating everywhere, which many would see as his own Grand Theory of the World. Foucault wants to show how power is bound up with knowledge. What we understand knowledge to be is a political consideration, sometimes.I have used this book in a class I teach which is a sort of literary inquiry into madness. How is it depicted? How is it defined in various settings, in certain stories? How is related to the psychic, paranormal, fantasy, horror, faith? Why is magic not considered knowledge in most settings? I also use the book in a course on language and literacy. We inevitably talk about our families, our own experiences with madness/psychiatry/how we treat madness today/the homeless crazies that ride public transportation, largely untreated today.Foucault, with Thomas Szasz and others, were seen as part of an anti-psychiatry movement. Maybe the de-institutionalization of the mentally ill came about in part because of this movement. I think in general Foucault, following the Renaissance view of madness, romanticizes it as a kind of alternative truth. And I worked in a psych hospital for a number of years and worried about the over-medicalization of people. I still do. But I have a son who sometimes experiences psychotic episodes; I think without some treatment he would not be able to fully function in the world. I live in Chicago where there are thousands of mentally ill folks on the streets, inadequately treated, in my opinion. And in my view you can romanticize all of that. These folks aren't just free; many of them are actually homeless. So while I think Foucault's book is brilliant--I really do; I like Kind Lear's wise fool and the art of Bosch and the poetry of sweet mad John Clare--it also has to be understood with some caution.

  • Mamdouh Abdullah
    2019-02-19 19:29

    أفضل من يملك تعريف عن فوكو هو فوكو نفسه عندما قال: أنا عاهل الأشياء التي قلتها وأحتفظ بسلطة رهيبة عليها: سلطة قصيدتي, وسلطة المعنى الذي أردت إعطاءها إياه. لست فيلسوفاً ولا مؤرخاً. أنا صانع أسهم نارية. أصنع شيئاً صالحاً في النهاية لضرب حصار, لشن حرب, للقيام بعمل تخريبي, لكنني أدافع عن إمكانية العبور, عن إمكانية التقدم, عن إمكانية إسقاط الجدران. إن صانع الأسهم النارية هو جيولوجي أولاً, أي عالم بطبقات الأرض. يتأمل طبقات الأرض وثناياها وصدوعها. ما الذي يسهُل حفره؟ ما الذي سيصمد؟ ينظر إلى القلاع كيف هي منغرسة في الأرض, ويتفحص التضاريس التي يمكن استعمالها للتخفي أو لشن حرب. و بمجرد أن يحدد كل ذلك تحديداً عينياً واضحاً, تبقى التجربة وتحسس الطريق, فنرسل المكلفين بالاستطلاع وننصب الجنود الرقباء ونعمل على إقامة العالقات, ثم نحدد الخطة الحربية التي سنستعملها. هل سنحفر الخنادق؟ هل سنضرب حصاراً ؟ هل سنضع لغماً؟ أم سنشن هجوماً مباشراً؟ ولا تعدو الطريقة في النهاية أن تكون هذه الإستراتيجية....ما معنى أن يكون المرء مجنوناً؟ من يقرر الأمر؟ إلى أي عهد يعود ذلك؟ هذه الأسئلة الثقيلة أجاب عليها الفيلسوف الفرنسي ميشيل فوكو في عمله الضخم: تاريخ الجنون في العصر الكلاسيكي, والصادر بترجمة متميزة للناقد و المترجم المتميز سعيد بنكراد من المركز الثقافي العربي.القراءة لفوكو لا تختلف عن مسمى الكتاب, القراءة له هي ضرب من الجنون, والكتابة عن بحثه هذا ومحاولة تلخيصه لا يعدو أن يكون الأمر مجنوناً كذلك. عند قراءة أولية لكتاب فوكو حفريات المعرفة أغلقت الكتاب في حينه, لعلي في وقت ما أفهم ماذا يريد فوكو, وإلى ماذا يرمي في كتاباته.عنوان الكتاب وشهرته يحملان شيئاً جذاباً … الجنون وفوكو. يكفي أن تقول جنون فوكو لتعرف كيف أثمرت تجربة فوكو في ميدان الفكر لتصل إلى معرفة حقيقة لطبيعة هذا العمل الضخم. فوكو عانى من مرض نفسي رهيب بسبب شذوذه، والذي أودى بحياته لا حقاً بعد إصابته بمرض نقص المناعة المكتسبة. عرض نفسه على أخصائيين في علم النفس, وسجن لفترة قصيرة في إحدى المصحات العقلية. من هذه التجربة سنعرف اهتمام فوكو بظاهرة الجنون, والتي كرس لها أطروحته الجامعية الكبيرة، لقد فهِم مشكلة الجنون أكثر من غيره. عندما بحث وكشف في الخيالات الشعبية والآداب والفنون والمستشفيات وأروقة البرلمان والسجون توصل إلى اكتشافه الكبير عن الحدود الفاصلة بين الجنون والعقل. استطاع أن يشفى من جنونه، وليس عبثا أنه فهم مشكلة الجنون أكثر من غيره. حولته تجربته الشخصية الحادة إلى مفكر كبير, وأستاذاً في بيركلي والسوربون و في مدارس عملاقة، وهذا ليس بالشيء القليل.ميزة أخرى أعطت هذا الكتاب دينامكية أكبر, وهي متعة القراءة: ” لا بد أن يوفر الكتاب المتعة للقراء الذين يطالعونه”. وشعور المتعة هذا لا يأتي إلا بأسلوب فوكو الأدبي في كتابه تاريخ الجنون. أسلوب فوكو في الكتابة أسلوب نيتشوي متفجر. ويكفي أن تقرأ لفوكو كيف يقرأ لوحة بوش سفينة الحمقى لتعتقد أن هذا الكاتب ليس إلا شاعراً. لا أنكر أني واجهت عدة صعوبات في فهم بعض الفصول. هذه الصعوبات وأنا أقرأ الكتاب تحولت إلا متعة لجمال أسلوب ميشيل فوكو. حين قرأت بداية تأريخ الجنون في الآداب العالمية وجدت شخصيات روائية لم يذكر فوكو اسمها صراحة تظهر أمامي, وكأنه يحلل ظاهرة الجنون في الأدب, لا في العصر الكلاسيكي. جنون الهوى الميئوس منه هو الذي قاد هيثكليف, بطل رواية إيميلي برونتي لأن يكسر زجاج النافذة ويصرخ من داخل أعماقه وهو يشتم كاثرين إيرينشاو، ثم في نهاية هذا الجنون والصراخ يتمنى أن يلحق بها, وأن يدفن بجانبها, لأنه أولاً وأخيراً يعشق كاثرين. هذا الشخصية التي تخبئ أخطاءها داخل الجنون تبدأ لا إرادياً في البحث عن جوهر, إنها تقول الحقيقة عندما تتهم نفسها. جنون السيدة ماكبث في عمل شكسبير يكشف لأولئك الذين يجب ألا يصرخوا عن كلمات لم تُهمس إلا في آذان صماء.السطور الأولى من الكتاب كانت مفاجأة. حين يختفي الجذام في نهاية القرون الوسطى, يقول فوكو أن هذه المدن التي غادرها هذا المرض أصبحت كيانات عقيمة وغير مأهولة! وراحت تنتظر بواسطة وسائل وممارسات سحرية انبعاثاً جديداً للشر ووجهاً جديداً للخوف وطقوساً متجددة للتطهر والإقصاء!. حين تختفي كارثة طبية ما في القرون الوسطى مثلاً كما دلل فوكو في بداية كتابه هذا, ألا يجب أن يكون هذا الاختفاء ينحى منحى إيجابياً لشئون السكان وتجمعاتهم؟ سيصبح الكائن البشري في مأمن من الإصابة بمرض مميت, فلماذا يوصف اختفاء المرض بالفاجعة!بشكل غير مباشر, يشير فوكو إلى التنازع والاختلاف والصراع كسب من أسباب الوجود. عدم التنازع سيؤدي إلى الركود والخمول, والتنازع والصراعات سيحرك الراكد وقد ينتج منه ما يغذي التطورات الحضارية في مجالات مختلفة كالسياسة والطب الخ. الحياة الاجتماعية بأكملها ليست إلا صراعاً متواصلاً بين المصالح الخاصة. كل إنسان يسعى وراء ذاته, ولكن المجتمع ينتفع من هذا الصراع الجاري وراء المصالح الذاتية, إذ هو يحصل على النتيجة الأخيرة, حيث تنمو بها ثروته العلمية والاقتصادية والسياسية.

  • Trevor
    2019-03-05 14:36

    Philosophy for Foucault is a discourse, I guess a series of texts that cluster around a single topic and have a meaning as much based on their history as their current ‘meaning’. It is too easy to get tangled in knots with words here – but this book is actually quite a simple read and incredibly interesting. There is the bit that is often quoted - the idea that hysteria was once considered to be a woman’s madness caused by her womb wandering around her body and thereby causing mental problems. I’m quite sure it would.But the truly interesting bits of this are around madness as a social construction. It is fascinating that prior to the rise of capitalism madness did not really exist. There were town idiots, but these people were often protected as being possessed by spirits or something similar. Apparently Bedlam, the mental asylum, had previously been a hospital for leprosy and once leprosy no longer infected Europe it was converted into a mental asylum - somehow we had coped prior to this without such asylums. Foucault’s point being that our society needs outcasts and when there were no longer any lepers we created madmen. There is remarkable stuff about tours of asylums conducted by the inmates who might throw a bit of a turn along and way and need to be replaced by another inmate. I know that up until the late 1800 such tours were still popular forms of weekend entertainment in Melbourne.The relationship between madness and unemployment – how being unemployed was a clear sign of being insane – helped put many people into work houses of the mad.This really is a fascinating book and well worth reading. If I have concerns about it, they are mainly around the idea that by defining madness as a social construction it did allow governments to close down institutions and put the mad onto the streets with no care and no protection.

  • Andrew
    2019-02-23 13:30

    I must admit, I didn't read this entire book. However, I do feel I read enough of it to get the general idea. Foucault is trying to distance himself from history here. He dislikes the "victorious" narrative of history and instead seeks to build an anthropology based around one aspect of the human sciences, employing the method of "archaeology." Borrowing Nietzsche's genealogy approach, Foucault excavates various uses of confinement or separation of the "madman" overtime, and looks at shifts and discontinuities in the usage of madness and how society (of course, always French) seeks to deal with them. First the mad are put in boats and floated out to see, then they are kept in general penal facilities, and then put in their own special asylums, where even more shades of madness can be teased out. The mad are deemed unreasonable and unintelligible by society, and therefore no attempt is made to hear their voice, which Foucault represents as "silence" or a "murmur." Rational man, throughout all of these periods, finds it necessary to find a mad Other and cordon him off. Reason needs an intelligible unreason in order to define itself. Enter "homo dialecticus." In the appendix we see a hint of what may be Foucault the cultural theorist, hypothesizing that humans need unreason, in the form of dreams, fantasies, madness, etc., in order to define our existences. In the end, however, it is hard to get to any idea of a real "truth" beneath these dialectics, as each side is a cultural construct. In this text, we also see the beginnings of Foucault's ideas about sites serving as technologies of policing, which he will expand in later works dealing both with external policing and internal "self-care."

  • سمارا البياتي
    2019-03-10 12:34

    عمل نظري أكاديمي بحت تناول أندفاع الجسد والروح وتخطيهما لحدود المعقول والمستقيم والعيش داخل عوالم اللاعقل التي لاتعترف بأية حدود.ركاب "سفينة الحمقى" هم شخصيات مجردة، أنواع أخلاقية كالجشع والحساس والملحد والمتعجرف .. وضعوا بالقوة ضمن الركاب الحمقى في رحلة أبحار بلا ميناء.أنتشرت في جميع أوربا دور لحجز مرضى الجذام بشكل واسع في القرن الخامس عشر.ثم تحولت الى دور رعاية لأيواء الفقراء والمشردين والعاطلين والعجزة والمرضى بالأخص الأمراض التناسلية التي كانت قد بدأت تنتشر انتشارآ كبيرآ في القرن السادس عشر.أختفى الجذام تمامآ في القرن السادس عشر الا من بعض الحالات وتحولت دور الحجز الى مستشفيات وفضاء تطبق فيه أجراءات حجز تعسفية ذات طابع بوليسي.أما نزلائها فكان خليطآ عجيبآ من المنحرفون والمصابون بأمراض تناسلية والمبذرون والشواذ جنسيآ والمتهمون بالقذف في المقدسات الدينية والخميائيون والمنحلون .. مجموعة من الكائنات وجدت نفسها في النصف الثاني من القرن السابع عشر في الطرف الاخر معزولة وملقى بها في المستشفيات التي ستصبح بعد قرن او قرنين حقولآ مغلقة للجنون.لقد أصبح الجنون رديفآ للخطيئة.فبأختراع فضاء الحجز داخل منظومة الخيال الاخلاقية أهتدت الفترة الكلاسيكية الى وطن والى مكان للخلاص المشترك من الخطايا ضد الجسد والأخطاء ضد العقل.تشير الأحصائات التي أجريت نهاية القرن السادس عشر الى وجود 3000 شخص من الفقراء والمشردين والمتسولين والمعوقين والمنحرفين، كانوا نزلاء السجن الكبير الذي شيد في فضاءات اوربا بأكملها والذين أصبحوا رفقاء للمجانين وأقرباء لهم الى الحد الذي لم يستطيعوا فكاكآ منهم في نهاية القرن الثامن عشر.كانت وظيفة هذه الدور الأصلاح الأخلاقي وتخليص الأفراد وتطهيرهم ضمن مناهج دينية غاية في التعسف والاشمئزاز.مما خلق نظام أخلاقي صارم من خلال عملية تجميع في دور الحجز بكل الفئات التي تدخل ضمن السلوك المدنس.وبذلك تم تشكيل عالم جديد من خلال الحجز وأجراءاته الغريبة فلكي يكون ممكنا أدانة هؤلاء المسجونين والتعامل معهم كغرباء عن وطنهم كان يجب ان يصبحوا فاقدين للعقل من خلال تجربة تؤدي الى أستلاب العقل ليصبح للجنون تصورآ واضحآ ويكون الحجز منفى ليلوذ بالصمت الى النهاية.وبذلك تحول اللاعقل الى موضوع عندما أنطلق في رحلة منفى لمدة قرن ظل فيها صامتآ.وهذا يدحض مشروعية المقولة التي تشير بأن الجنون لم يصبح من الاختصاص العلمي الدقيق لطبيب الأمراض النفسية الا عندما تخلص من براثن الممارسات الدينية والاخلاقية.فاللاعقل لم يصبح موضوعآ للمعرفة الا عندما وقع بشكل مسبق تحت طائلة التحريم.وأخيرآ في القرن التاسع عشر بدأ مصطلح المرض العقلي يأخذ مكانه.ولم يتغير أسلوب العلاج الذي أعتمد على العقاب حتى يتعلم السلوك "العاقل".الكتاب غني وزاخر بمعرفة علمية تخص الجنون والعقل واللاعقل والاختلال النفسي وكل السلوكيات الغريبة والشاذة ولذلك فهو يتحدث عن الطب العقلي والسيكلوجيا وكل الاشكال العلاجية التي اعقبت العصر الكلاسيكي معلنة عن ميلاد "المجنون المريض" الذي سيخلف المجنون "الدرويش" و"الوحش" و"الشاذ".مثير للاهتمام ولكنه مادة علمية تحتاج الى التأني والأعادة في القراءة مرات ومرات لبلوغ الفكرة وفهم المعنى.المراجعة على مدونتي

  • Aslı Can
    2019-03-14 11:30

    Foucault bu kitaba bir düşünürden ziyade bir tarih yazıcısı olarak eşlik ediyor. Ve eşlik ettiği tarih de pek iç açıcı bir tarih olmadığından dolayı benim için zorlayıcı bir kitap oldu. Okumak için kendimi kütüphaneye attım sürekli ama kütüphane de çok tehlikeli bir ortam ve elimde bir anda başka kitaplar beliriverdi Deliliğin Tarihi'ni okumaya çalışırken. Ve 2018'e girmeden bitirme sözümden dolayı sonunda bitirdim kitabı.Dünyanın tüm delileri, birleşin!

  • طاهر الزهراني
    2019-03-14 17:14

    كتاب عظيم، يتحدث عن تاريخ الجنون في فرنسا ودول أوروبا، لا يكتفي بالجنون فقط بل وما درج تحته من أمراض، وليس فقط سرد تاريخي، وإنما قراءة تفصيلية عن نفسيات وخطابات دينية وسياسية وفكرية، كتب بمسحة أدبية مذهلة جدا، الكتاب مرعب، ويرصد حقائق ودراسات مهمة، أعجبني في نهاية الكتاب التعريج حول الفن والجنون

  • Khawla Al jafari
    2019-03-17 16:12

    - ما الجنون ؟ - إذا كانت لديك إجابة معلّبة -حتمًا -ستتبدّل بعد قراءتك هذا الكتاب .• مشهدٌ يبتعدُ عن الفانتازيا : سفينة مبحرةٌ في عرض البحر تضمّ مجانين المدينة ، تتنقّلُ بهم من ميناءٍ إلى آخر ولا تقذف بهم إلى موانئ العالم العاقل ، عالمان البحرُ بينهما يتّسع ، كلّ منّهما يريد حراسة نفسهِ من شوائب الآخر. • مشهد آخر : المستشفيات في أوروبا أو دور التّصحيح -التّابعة لسلطة الكنيسة - كانت تضمّ من اقترفوا خطيئة الجنون والمجون ( والأخير انحراف أخلاقي) فما العلاقة بينهما ؟ ربّما لأنّهما يهدّدان السّلطة بمساحة من الحريةِ المطلقة ، هل يعدّ الإقصاء حلاً ؟ المفارقة هنا أنَّ من يخلق الرّغبة بهذه الحريّة ويدفع نحو الجنون أو المجون هو العقل الذي من شدّة ما عرف التبست عليه الأمور . • مسألة أخرى : كان كلام المجنون لا يؤخذ به ، ثمّ صار هذا الكلام المبهم المستغلق يحمل نبوءة ما أو حقيقة يبحث عنها العاقل ، مرحلة انتقاليَّة من الهامش إلى المركز تبعتها موجة ادّعاء الجنون الذي صار مرادفًا للإبداع والاختلاف ، لكن فعليًّا من المستفيد من إحداث كلّ هذه التّبدّلات ؟ ولم ؟ \\فوكو ينفي عن نفسهِ سلطة الخطاب التي تسيطر على القارئ وتوجهه، لكنّ لغته الشّاهقة كانت المصيدة للتّفاعل عاطفيًا من المجنون .. فوكو كاتب عبقري :)

  • Fahima Jaffar
    2019-03-15 11:15

    كم مرّةً وصمتُ كاتباً/عملاً ما بالجنون، ذلكَ الحسُّ المختلِفُ المفارِقُ الغريبُ الساحر، القدرةُ على الخروجِ من الصندوقِ وَقلبه بمن/ما فيه. إن كنتُ أفرطتُ في إسباغِ هذه السمةِ حتى استهلكتها على كثيرٍ من قراءاتي السابقة، فعليَّ إمّا مراجعةُ تلكَ القائمة المستطيلة أو تعيين سمةٍ جديدةٍ لـ فوكو. على كل حال، سأحجم عن إطلاقِ "سمةِ" الجنون عليه لأنَّ اختلافه – وإن بدا متطرفاً قصداً – فهو لا ينشدُ الاختلاف لذاته. بل يقرأُ فيه وجه الحقيقة – لنقل أوجهها – وَيجدُ في انفصامِ الأحداثِ وَتفككها تجلّي المعرفةِ الأشفَّ وَغاية مرادِها الأسمى.يستقرئ فوكو تشكّل مفهوم الجنون منذ نهاية العصور الوسطى حتى أواخر العصر الكلاسيكي، دونَ أن يتعمّد في قرائته استقصاء مفهومٍ ينمو بشكلٍ تراكميٍّ مضطرد في اتساقٍ معَ الخطابات المهيمنة. على العكسِ من ذلك، يستنتجُ فوكو - كما يقرّ بذلك ديفيد هارفي في كتابه "حالة ما بعد الحداثة" – وجودَ "علاقة وثيقة بين أنظمةِ المعرفة (الخطابات) التي تجدول الوسائل وَنوع الممارسات التي تحقق السيطرة والهيمنة الاجتماعية داخل سياقاتٍ محددةٍ متعينة." ليكونَ المارستان أو الحجزُ مثالاً على "المواقع حيثُ تبنى تنظيمات المؤسسات الموزعة والمتدرجة للسلطة وباستقلالٍ عن إستراتيجية منهجية للهيمنة الطبقية. وتفاصيل ما يحدث في كل موقع لا يمكن فهمها بمجرّد الإحالة إلى نظريةٍ تعميميةٍ كبرى."يبلغُ ميشيل فوكو مراده عن طريق قراءةٍ تفصيليةٍ متأنية لا لواقعِ الجنونِ منفرداً فحسب، بل في علاقةٍ متذبذبةٍ معَ العقل: الكينونة التي يكشف بها الجنون عن وجهه المعلن كـ"غيابٍ مستعادٍ" تارة "لا وجودَ للجنون إلا بالإحالة على العقل. ولكن حقيقةَ العقل تكمن في الكشفِ عن جنونٍ يدينه، لكي يعملَ هو الآخر داخلَ جنونٍ يعمل على الكشفِ عنه. ص 54" أو كآخر خارجٍ عنه وَمُدينٍ لممارساتهِ اللا-عاقلة المارقةِ عن منظومةِ عصره. أمضيتُ ما يربو على الشهرِ في قِراءةِ هذا العمل، أحملهُ كوصمةِ هَبَلٍ كبيرةٍ وَأخططه بالرصاصِ ككتابٍ مدرسيّ. ما زلتُ رغمَ ذلك في حاجةٍ لقراءةٍ ثانيةٍ وَعاشرة

  • Kate
    2019-02-18 17:16

    It took me almost two months to finish this behemoth, but it was worth it. Two months ago, I was reading an article in the New York Times on modern Catholicism that mentioned Foucault, and from there I read a brief overview on Wikipedia. There I found a reference to the History of Madness, Foucault's doctoral thesis, and since I'm interested in insanity, asylums and so forth, I checked this one out of the library.I'm not going to lie, this is a dense tome. I read it in 5-20 page increments, mostly because I had to keep stopping to look up a word or reference. (For example, I learned that pyrexia is another word for fever.) I particularly enjoyed the beginning segment speaking of how the mad were clumped together with other "outsider" groups: homosexuals, criminals, and "libertines" for example. There was also a great exploration of how leprosy in the Middle Ages had already created a structure for isolation of unwanted members of society (this really appealed to me as I had a chapter on medieval treatments of leprosy in my undergraduate thesis). It's also interesting how much of the thought applied to the understanding of madness applies today--although to other groups. For example, all those subject to the Great Confinement were those who operated outside the norms of society: the indigent, the poor, the mad, the criminal, and religious fanatics. By confining them, society's goal was to keep them out of society and therefore from interfering in the day to day life of others, and preventing them from corrupting others. I see this idea continually reflected in America, in the divisive tone of politics, where the poor and indigent are treated as children in need of comforting by the Left and as non-functioning members of society by the Right. I was only mildly disappointed that the book did not extend to the 19th century treatment of madness, however, as Foucault explains, there is far more in this era to talk about than can be covered in this book. At that point, madness stopped being a topic of philosophy and became instead a disease, and a subject for physicians.

  • Ayça Baran
    2019-02-20 14:09

    Ansiklopedi niteliğinde bir eser. Okuduğum süre boyunca Foucault'yu git gide daha çok sevdim resmen. Kitabı okumadan önce Rousseau'yu, Goya'yı, Nietzche'yi, Sade'ı, Erasmus'u ve daha nicesini biliyor olmalısınız.Sosyoloji ve psikoloji konusunda temelleriniz varsa kitabı çok daha rahat anlayabilirsiniz. Kitaplığımda geniş bir sıra boyunca psikoloji ve felsefe serilerim olmasına karşın ben okurken zorlandım ve bazı kısımlarda yavaş ilerlemek zorunda kaldım.Kitap aslında öyle çok şeye değiniyor ki kitap bitince şundan bahsediyor demek kitaba ve Foucault'ya hakaret niteliği taşır gibi geliyor insana. Kitaptan aklımda kalan en ilginç şey ise şu oldu: "Tımarhaneler ve okulların kurulmasının aynı tarihlere denk gelmesi bir tesadüf değil."

  • ઈiavasĦ
    2019-03-20 19:27

    هدف فوکو این است که ثابت کند دیوانگی یک وضعیت ثابت نیست و باید آن را نتیجه تعارضات اجتماعی قلمداد کرد که در آن انسانها به لحاظ تاریخی دچار از خود بیگانگی می شوند. پس مهم است بدانیم دیوانگی چگونه تداوم می یابد و برای ترویج آن به عنوان یک مقوله چه ابزارهایی به کار گرفته میشود و برای تمایز نهادن میان دیوانه و عاقل از چه فرایندی استفاده می شود.از خوندنش بسیار لذت بردم

  • Richard
    2019-03-02 12:25

    It is said that Foucault enjoyed being whipped.

  • أحمد شاكر
    2019-03-07 16:28

    الجنون وتاريخه في العصر الكلاسيكي. عمل ضخم. تتبع شامل للجنون وتطور فكرته. فوكو لم يغفل شيئا خلال بحثه. إن قراءة كتاب كهذا، دليل على أننا ما زلنا نمتلك عقلا. الجنون شهادة إثبات للعقل. من خلال القراءة سنعرف أننا لسنا بعيدين عن تلك الحالة، حالة اللاعقل. هنا، موضوع غير مطروق، لذا ستجد نفسك أمام كم هائل من المعلومات والأفكار الممتعة المتعلقة بالعقل واللاعقل. كتاب لابد من عودة له مرة أخرى..

  • Erik Graff
    2019-03-16 16:11

    By sophomore year in college I was beginning to think of becoming a psychotherapist and actually held two jobs at a psychiatric hospital during the year following, one setting up a treatment assessment program, the other administrating and evaluating diagnostic tests such as the MMPI. Then, later, back at Grinnell, I was trained in drug counseling a worked in the school's crisis center as well as in its draft counseling office. My real interest was in continental depth psychology, but the jobs and the regular psych courses kept involving me in what passed for psychotherapeutics for most people exposed to it in the United States. My major in Religion was partially a front for extended, mostly independent, study of depth psychology, the department being liberal about allowing such things.Upon graduation I went on immediately to Union Theological Seminary, majoring in their Psychiatry and Religion program and interning at a teaching hospital of Columbia University while attending seminars there, one for its psychiatric residents, another for psychiatric social workers and a third for chaplains like myself. Here, in New York, the emphasis was far more psychoanalytic than in Iowa or Illinois. Finishing seminary I intended to go on for an STM. with further study at the Institute for Religion and Health, coming under care of the UUA with every expectation of being a psychotherapist salaried by the church, our clients paying in accord with their ability to do so. My interests by then had become focused on questions of value and faith.Sadly, the UUA discontinued its pastoral counseling program (one that Alfred Adler had worked for upon coming to NYC as a refugee from Nazism) and, more happily, I had fallen in love for a hometown girl. The consequence is that I returned to Chicago.In Chicago I sat for the city and state civil service examinations pertinent to psychotherapeutic practice. Job offers came in, but all of them were for coercive programs, either in the prison system or in drug rehabilitation. Although I'd trained in drug counseling, I had no interest in serving in such a capacity if it had any coercive element and the positions Illinois was offering were all connected to the criminal "justice" system. I ended up working in three institutions for adolescents, all of whom had been designated psychotic, virtually none of whom were.A few years of this and I returned to school. Illinois at that time had tougher requirements than New York. A Ph.D. would be necessary for the kind of practice I was interested in and for being able to pursue further Institute training. Loyola University, just a mile from home, had the largest philosophy program in the States, my roommate was in it, and the department was continental in orientation. Since my primary interest was in value questions, the fit seemed good, certainly better than their psychology programs.Here, too, there was disappointment. The Advanced Standing Committee of the graduate school took a year to evaluate my previous four years of graduate study, leaving me adrift, not knowing what my requirements would be. I took courses relevant to what I thought would be my dissertation topic, then, that year later, found I had a bunch of stuff to do that wasn't relevant. Meanwhile I discovered that the department had but one person, Richard Chessick, who knew anything about my subject area. Then, having finished the course work for the M.A. and being one course from finishing the Ph.D., he had his contract terminated. Who to be on the committee? I thought seriously of switching to political economy.Meanwhile, I got a job lead from the fellow, Bill Ellos, I'd been a research assistant to for three years, a lead that led to a job offer, albeit only part-time to start, in the dean's office of the part-time division. The people seemed nice, the job useful, besides, it would give my new wife (the hometown girl) free tuition, so I took it, obtaining another one at Evanston Hospital to help pay off the school loans. Eventually it became full-time, promotions followed, I was made assistant dean and a career-path quite different than the one I'd set out on seemed clear.Although I continued to take classes at Loyola while working there, now I wanted to teach in one of their interdisciplinary graduate programs which would combine religion, psychology and philosophy. That seemed to fulfill the need to be useful much along the lines that being a psychotherapist had once seemed to promise. Besides, unlike most psychology practiced in the U.S.A., it wouldn't be coercive.It was during this period of settling into the dean's office that I read Foucault's Madness and Civilization, a book which just served to reinforce what I'd read about previously in the study of the anti-psychiatry movement, the humanistic psychologists and the works of Thomas Szasz and what I'd learned working in institutions supposedly designed to help the mentally ill.

  • Steve
    2019-03-21 11:32

    I was a double major in psychology and English as an undergraduate, with a minor in philosophy. When I graduated in January of 1998, I hadn't yet heard about whether I'd been admitted to graduate school and couldn't find a job teaching English, my back-up plan. I decided to turn my philosophy minor into a major, as I already had more courses than required for a minor and was only 4 away. It so happened that I was missing were mostly already determined: (1) history of ancient philosophy, (2) classical modern philosophy, (3) senior seminar. I also had one elective (I took contemporary European philosophy with Tom Sheehan). For my senior seminar, I decided to take a graduate course on Foucault and Deleuze, as I had generally enjoyed continental philosophy and especially Deleuze (in a class I had read Marcuse, my prof suggested I read Deleuze and Guattari's "Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia" and chat with him about it over coffee). Unfortunately, most of the class was on Foucault and we only covered two Deleuze texts: (A) Foucault, and (B) Difference and Repetition. However, this means I'm more well-versed in Foucault than I'd care to be. Before the class started, I talked to my prof, Andrew Cutrofello, and asked if there was anything he suggested I read before class started. He suggested three: (1) James Miller's (by the way, my father's name) "The Passions of Michel Foucault," as a biography of him, (2) Madness and Civilization, and (3) Discipline and Punish. We wouldn't be reading (2) and (3) in class, as the focus was more on Foucault's epistemology (i.e., The Order of Things, The Archaeology of Knowledge, etc.). So, I read them all -- (1) was full of stories of Foucault's sex life, anal fisting, and the like -- I had a hard time thinking of a person with my father's name writing about these. However, (2) and (3) were interesting to me. Madness and Civilization was especially interesting, as I was a psychology major, with interests in clinical psychology. Unfortunately, I took the work to be founded on historical facts, and it wouldn't be until my Ph.D. program in clinical psychology, where I wrote my history of psychology paper on changing bases of diagnoses of mental illness, that I found that Foucault's historical facts were often debated and sometimes made up.The Mahers, two Harvard historians, published a reply to Foucault's text in "The American Psychologist." According to them, in 1494, Sebastian Brant's wrote a book called "Narrenschiff," or "Ship of Fools." However, Brant intended "Narrenschiff" to be a historical allegory, and not actually a recounting of historical facts. In fact, the only evidence of such ships were wood cutting with pictures of boats and "ruffians" on then. Foucault mistakenly took this to mean that these ships were real entities. He went on to base a large portion of his text on the idea of such things. While there clearly is reason to believe in culturally and temporally specific aspects of diagnosis, the rather radical epistemological break that Foucault was propagating was largely false. Furthermore, the psychologists, who rarely go so far as to research things they like for themselves, started publishing Foucault's work as fact, thereby leading to falsities being largely believed in the field. According to the Mahers, psychology texts in the 1980s took the satire of the ship of fools to be fact because of Foucault. If you're interested in reading their research, see the following article:Maher, W.B. & Maher, B. (1982). "Stultifera Navis or Ignis Fatuus?" American Psychologist, 37(7), 756-761I hear that "Madness and Civilization" was a shorted version of Foucault's text, "The History of Madness." I have not yet read the latter, and am certainly hoping that his sloppy scholarship was explained in it. Maybe that should be on my "to read" shelf, of maybe I'm too disappointed in the let-down of a seemingly good text being flawed that makes me not wanting to read it more.

  • أسيل
    2019-02-20 16:23

    روح المجانين ليست مجنونة!

  • Kathrina
    2019-03-08 19:26

    Foucault's first published book, when he might have identified as a structuralist. I admit I glossed over the center chapters including the classifications of various archaic mental illnesses, but I read deeply the first two chapters discussing banishment and confinement as technologies of discipline/regularization. Pairs well with Conscience and Convenience: The Asylum and Its Alternatives in Progressive America.

  • Don Rea
    2019-03-17 15:16

    So far I'm about fifty or sixty pages in, and I've completely lost track of what this gibbering madman is raving about. Perhaps this is a poor translation, but after the first ten pages even individual sentences are meaningless and syntactically ambiguous. I re-read paragraphs, sometimes ten or twelve times, but I simply can't make any of this make any sense. I'll slog through for a couple more chapters to see if it gets any better, but I don't have much hope for this basket of word salad.

  • hayatem
    2019-03-14 16:37

    عليك ان تسقط في الهاوية لتدرك مدى جحيم العودة إلى الأرض مرة أخرى.فوكو عانى من شرارة الجنون والتشرذم في الملاجئ(دور الحجز) فأتى هذا الكتاب كثمرة مضنية تمثل شكل الجحيم الذي يعانيه الإنسان لإستعادة ذاته من جديد وسط جماهير غفيرة لاترحم، بل موشومة بلسان لاذع وسليط وجاهز للتصنيف والتأطير المعلب والمفرغ من دماثة الرحمة.الكتاب ملحمة فكرية فلسفية طبية ونفسية بحته لاتسع السطور لوصف جهد الكاتب في الإنعتاق من سلطة الجنون في هذا العصر.العصر الكلاسيكي امتاز بالقسوة على الإنسان الضعيف والمغلوب ، الذي لسوء حظه ساقه القدر للمرض النفسي والعقلي ليركنه الآخر في زاوية المنبوذين مع ثلة المجرمين والمنحرفين.ارتبط الجنون في هذا العصر بالأخلاق بصورة غير مسبوقة، أي ان تكون مجنونا يعني ان تكون معاقأً أخلاقياً ! هكذا عرف العصر الكلاسيكي الجنون.هذا العصر شهد الكثير من التقلبات ازاء التعامل مع اللاعقل ،كما أنه عجز عن تصنيف الجنون بشكل دقيق، بالرغم من بعض الإجتهادات في علاج الجنون الا انه من وجهة نظري فشل في علاج الجنون بصورة طبية مهنية وانسانية على الرغم من ازدهار العلوم والطب في القرن الثامن والتاسع عشر. بعض انواع العلاجات المتبعة في القضاء على المرض العقلي هو بتزويج الرجل\المرأة المجنونة ظنا بأنه دواء لجنونها. هناك انواع علاجات اخرى أكثر جنونا كاستبدال دم المريض بدم احد الحيوانات .من المضحك المبكي ان المريض يتجاوب مع العلاج وذلك بتغير حالته من الصخب والهيجان الى الصمت والهدوء !من المبكي أيضا في هذا العصر هو ان الملاجئ(دور الحجز) والمصحات استخدمت بشكل قمعي خصوصا تجاه المرأة ،فالعناد والرفض يضعك في خانة الجنون. ويتضح من سلطة هذا العصر الدور الذكوري الذي مورس في تعنيف وقمع المرأة، وسلب الحريات العامة وحق الإنسانية على الآخر في المعاملة بالمثل.لم يخلو هذا العصر من سلطة القضاء والكنيسة التي لعبت دورا في تهميش الجنون كحالة انسانية وأخلاقية.مع ظهور مدارس علم النفس ، المدرسةالتحليلية "فرويد" بدأ الجنون ياخذ نوعا ما الاعتراف بوجوده كحالة طبيعية متسقة مع طبيعة الحياة، بل كجزء من الوجود الإنساني الذي يعترف باللاعقل كنظير للعقل. وهي الحسنة الوحيدة في هذا العصر الخرافي.مايعيب هذا العصر كذلك رغم انتشار وظهور الفكر الإنسانويّ الا أن طريقة التعامل مع المريض العقلي واللاعقل عموما ظلت قاصرة على الإحسان والعمل الخيري، ولم تتجاوز ذلك في وضع حد لمأساة المريض العقلي الذي عانى التعذيب في السجون والملاجئ(دور الحجز) ، وطمس هويته الإنسانية. بل التدخل كان دائما شكليا ببناء المصحات والمستشفيات كبديل للسجون والملاجئ(دور الحجز)،وتوفير الرعاية الطبية، ولكن أغلبيتها ظل يمارس نفس الدور تقريبا.الكتاب دسم جدا ،عانيت جدا منه فهو مرهق فكريا. ستشعر باضطراب وانت تقرأه. وستلاحظ أيضا الكثير من التناقضات الفكرية في محتوى الكتاب حول التعامل مع اللاعقل، فايجابية تمحو سيئة لتظهر سلبية تطمس كل الحسنات السابقة.أحب الإشارة لإحتواء الكتاب على بعض المصطلحات المعقدة.الخلاصة:تاريخيا والى الآن يبقى دائما الآخر المختلف حالة ناشزة ، يستلذ العقل في طمس حريتها وكرامتها.

  • Malini Sridharan
    2019-03-14 12:26

    If foucault were alive today, I would comfort him in his old age whether he liked it or not.

  • Jessico
    2019-02-23 18:39

    Pascal: "Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness." (ix)If folly leads each man into a blindness where he is lost, the madman, on the contrary, reminds each man of his truth; in a comedywhere each man deceives the other and dupes himself, the madman is comedy to the second degree: the deception of deception; he utters, in his simpleton's language which makes no show of reason, the words of reason that release, in the comic, the comedy: he speaks love to lovers, the truth of life to the young, the middling reality of things to the proud, to the insolent, and to liars. (14)On all sides, madness fascinates man. The fantastic images it generates are not fleeting appearances that quickly disappear from the surface of things. By a strange paradox, what is born from the strangest delirium was already hidden, like a secret, like an inaccessible truth, in the bowels of the earth. When man deploys the arbitrary nature of his madness, he confronts the dark necessity of the world; the animal that haunts his nightmares and his nights of privation is his own nature, which will lay bare hell's pitiless truth; the vain images of blind idiocy - such are the world's Magna Scientia; and already, in this disorder, in this mad universe, is prefigured what will be the cruelty of the finale. In such images - and this doubtless what gives them their weight, what imposes such great coherence on their fantasy. (23)... Madness is the false punishment of a false solution, but by its own virtue it brings to light the real problem, which can then be truly resolved. It conceals beneath error the secret enterprise of truth. (33)In madness equilibrium is established, but it masks that equilibrium beneath the cloud of illusion. (34)In 17th century Paris, huge confinement centers were made that held more than one out of every hundred Parisian citizens. (paraphrase, 38) "It was no longer merely a question of confining those out of work, but of giving work to those who had been confined and thus making them contribute to the prosperity of all. The alternation is clear: cheap man-power in the periods of full employment and high salaries; and in periods of unemployment, reabsorption of the idle and social protection against agitation and uprisings." (51)"In its most general form, confinement is explained, or at least justified, by the desire to avoid scandal. ... There are aspects of evil that have such a power of contagion, such a force of scandal that any publicity multiplies them infinitely. Only oblivion can suppress them." (66-67)In the Renaissance, madness was present everywhere and mingled with every experience by its images or its dangers. During the classical period, madness was shown, but on the other side of bars; if present, it was at a distance, under the eyes of a reason that no longer felt any relation to it and that would not compromise itself by too close a resemblance. Madness had become a thing to look at: no longer a monster inside oneself, but an animal with strange mechanisms, a bestiality from which man had long since been suppressed. (70)To respect madness is not to interpret it as the involuntary and inevitable accident of disease, but to recognize this lower limit of human truth, a limit not accidental but essential. As death is the limit of human life in the realm of time, madness is its limit in the realm of animality. (81)Madness, then, was not merely one of the possibilities afforded by the union of soul and body; it was not just one of the consequences of passion. Instituted by the unity of soul and body, madness turned against that unity and once again put it into question. ... Madness was one of those unities in which laws were compromised, perverted, distorted-thereby manifesting such unity as evident and established, but also as fragile and already doomed to destruction. (89)There comes a moment in the course of passion when laws are suspended as though of their own accord, when movement either abruptly stops, without collision or absorption of any kind of active force, or is propagated, the action ceasing only at the climax of the paroxysm. (89)"Madness is no more than the derangement of the imagination." (93)Madness begins where the relation of man to truth is disturbed and darkened. (104)Madness is precisely at the point of contact between the oneiric and the erroneous; it traverses, in its variations, the surface on which they meet, the surface which both joins and separates them. (106)Thomas Sydenham would even observe that melancholics "are people who, apart from their complaint, are prudent and sensible, and who have an extraordinary penetration and sagacity." Thus Aristotle rightly observed that melancholics have more intelligence than other men. (118)Foucault discusses music and therapy, p. 178-179Fear p. 180If music cured, it was by acting upon the entire human being, by penetrating the body as directly, as efficaciously as it did the soul ... (178-179)Illusion can cure the illusory-while reason alone can free from the unreasonable. (187)"Do not glory in your state, if you are wise and civilized men; an instant suffices to disturb and annihilate that supposed wisdom of which you are so proud; an unexpected event, a sharp and sudden emotion of the soul will abruptly change the most reasonable and intelligent man into a raving idiot." (Matthey, Geneva physician influenced by Rousseau) (211-212)"Egotism, the soul of commerce, easily becomes envious and summons other faculties to its aid." (Spurzhein) (214)If the progress of knowledge dissipates error, it also has the effect of propagating a taste and even a mania for study... (217)A source of strong emotions and terrifying images which it arouses through fears of the Beyond, Catholicism frequently provokes madness; it generates delirious beliefs, entertains hallucinations, leads men to despair and to melancholia. (255)The slowness of revenge, like the insolence of desire, belongs to nature. (282-283)There is nothing that the madness of man invents which is not either nature made manifest or nature restored. (283)

  • Alan
    2019-03-06 18:23

    Foucault* provides context for our dozens of American cities now arresting the homeless, from Houston to Reno. We follow the lead of London in 2014, around Marble Arch, and of New Delhi, late last year preparing for Ivanka Trump’s visit, not to trouble her with have-nots. His subtitle is Insanity in the Age of Reason. He also illustrates how the asylums built to ward off great medical threats to society, leprosy and bubonic plague, found new use in ostracizing those who violated the Work Ethic: the slothful, those out of work. In the mid-17C France, men and boys might be sent to row military ships, the galleys, but women and children banished. By 1657, Monday the 14th of May, after the sacred mass prior, the Paris militia was sent “to hunt down beggars and herd them into the Hôpital”(49). The militia would become named, in the psychology of popular terror, “the archers of the Hôpital.” MF titles his first chapter on medieval madmen “Ship of Fools,” in period Latin, Stultifera Navis. In fact, those deemed mad were ushered out of towns, as were the needy later in Shakespearean England, remanded to their place of birth, where the parish was responsible for their care. Madmen were allowed to roam the countryside, but they were also frequently “handed over to boatmen; in Frankfurt in 1399, seamen were instructed to rid the city of a madman who walked about the streets naked”(8). Readers of Shakespeare will recall how Hamlet is diagnosed as crazy for attacking and killing Polonius behind the curtain. What is Hamlet’s treatment for madness? Why, he is handed over to boatmen to take him to England (where, perhaps, the Danes thought he would find mad companions). Rosencratz and Guildenstern, old former friends, accompany him. But he never arrives in the country where he became famous as a stage character. *Translated by the superior Richard Howard.

  • Shima Masoumi
    2019-03-19 14:39

    تاريخ جنون، همان طور كه از اسمش پيداست، به بررسي پيدايش آسايشگاه رواني و تا حدودي روانكاوي مي پردازد. از برخورد با جنون در دوران رونسانس و كلاسيك تا پيدايش نظريه هاي پينل و تولد آسايشگاه. تاريخ جنون از نظر من يكي از خوشخوان ترين كتاب هاي فركوست. و بخش نتيجه ي كتاب كه به بررسي جنون بزرگان هنر و تاثيرش روي آثارشان مي پردازد كه به شخصه براي من بسيار جالب و خواندني بود.

  •  Δx Δp ≥ ½ ħ
    2019-03-16 11:30

    arrgghhh...ya ampun... satu hal yang membuat sebal baca buku filsafat adalah saling berjejalnya kata-kata "langit" bak dewata yang susah dimengerti "makhluk-makhluk berotak terestial" seperti saia dalam bukunya, fuih... T_Tbanyak yang berpendapat filsafat itu sulit dan tidak menarik. tapi menururt saia, bukan karena "isi"nya saja yang rumit, penggunaan bahasa-bahasa "dewata" ituh justru malah meperparah filsafat untuk mudah dimengerti, yang ujung-ujungnya membuat kebanyakan orang keder baca buku filsafat :PPun dengan buku ini.Ditulis oleh seseorang nabi postmodernis yang kontroversial, buku ini konon adalah salah satu karya terbaik dari Foucault. Konon, dia adalah salah seorang tokoh pemikir terbesar di abad 20. Seorang juru selamat pemikiran, yang juga seorang sekaligus sejarahwan, aktivis politik, orator, dosen, namun juga.......... seorang gay dan pecandu ganja :Pmemang susah kalo baca buku filsafat bahasa inggris, selain banyak istilah yang memang dah canggih (nyaris gak ada di kamus biasa, jd harus membuat alis betekuk berlipat-lipat saking gak ngatrinya), juga penggunaan kata-kata yang aduhai, yang seharusnya, jika orang tersebut mau sedikit bermurah hati, bisa disampaikan dengan bahasa yang lebih "merakyat".maksud saia, lebih enakan membaca kalimat "untuk hal-hal yang lebih nyata" daripada membaca kalimat "untuk tataran yang lebih konkret" kan? bayangkan jika hal itu terjadi pada buku berbahasa Inggris. oh may gad! apalagi kalau kemampuan bahasa Inggrisnya cekak seperti saia :PMana banyak isitilah "njelimet" lagih, seperti "transdiskursif", "eksistensialisme", "fenomenologi", "community discountinuity", "strukturalisme", "episteme", "genealogi", "bio-fasisme", "oneirocriticism", dll yang bikin stress buka-buka kamus.padahal sebenarnya, ide-ide Foucault ituh "sederhana"--dan jenius seh :P-- tapi kalau dirangkai dengan kata-kata ajaib ituh, entahlah, kepala saia jadi sakit bacanya T_Tjd inget perkataan Wittgenstein (filsuf sekaligus sastrawan Austria), yang berujar (kira-kira ajah, kata persisnya saia lupa), pekerjaan para filsuf saat ini adalah tentang penggunaan bahasaT_T*ditulis setelah bangun dengan pusing coz baca buku ampe mabok jam 1 malem*

  • Oliver Bateman
    2019-03-19 11:36

    This brilliant book, which traces the shifting European "discourse systems" about madness from the late Middle Ages to the end of the 19th century, describes the process by which measures dealing with the insane shifted from exposure (as on the "ship of fools," if such things actually existed, or by wandering the countryside) to confinement (alongside the idle poor in "hospitals" and "charity wards") to paternalistic "medical" care (by doctors who, upon realizing that there were no curative techniques for these disorders, simply used their authority to silence and shame the "voices of unreason"; and then by psychoanalysts in the Freudian tradition, who focused all the powers of the "medical" tradition on creating an "absence that is also a total presence," using an "absolute Observation, a pure Silence...[to] punish and reward in a judgment that does not even condescend to language"). In addition to tracing these shifts, Foucault discusses--particularly in the first and last chapters of the book--the impact that this changed treatment of insanity has had on the production of "Art" in the Western world, concluding that, with the separation of madness from unreason, "it is [now] through the mediation of madness...[that] the world becomes culpable in relation to the work of art; it is now arraigned by the work of art, obliged to order itself by its language, compelled by it to a task of recognition, of reparation, to the task of restoring reason FROM that unreason TO that unreason." Also: If you're reading this book and haven't seen Jan Svankmajer's tremendous film Lunacy (http://www.metacritic.com/movie/lunacy), I would urge you to watch the latter while taking a break from the former.