Advertisement

History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 254–279 | Cite as

Errant life, molecular biology, and biopower: Canguilhem, Jacob, and Foucault

  • Samuel Talcott
Original Paper

Abstract

This paper considers the theoretical circumstances that urged Michel Foucault to analyse modern societies in terms of biopower. Georges Canguilhem’s account of the relations between science and the living forms an essential starting point for Foucault’s own later explorations, though the challenges posed by the molecular revolution in biology and François Jacob’s history of it allowed Foucault to extend and transform Canguilhem’s philosophy of error. Using archival research into his 1955–1956 course on “Science and Error,” I show that, for Canguilhem, it is inauthentic to treat a living being as an error, even if living things are capable of making errors in the domain of knowledge. The emergent molecular biology in the 1960s posed a grave challenge, however, since it suggested that individuals could indeed be errors of genetic reproduction. The paper discusses how Canguilhem and Foucault each responded to this by examining, among other texts, their respective reviews of Jacob’s The Logic of the Living. For Canguilhem this was an opportunity to reaffirm the creativity of life in the living individual, which is not a thing to be evaluated, but the source of values. For Foucault, drawing on Jacob’s work, this was the opportunity to develop a transformed account of valuation by posing biopower as the DNA of society. Despite their disagreements, the paper examines these three authors as different iterations of a historical epistemology attuned to errancy, error, and experimentation.

Keywords

Canguilhem Jacob Foucault Error Life Biopower Molecular biology 

References

  1. Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer. Sovereign power and bare life. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aristotle, (2001). On the soul. Santa Fe: Green Lion Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bachelard, G. ([1934] 1984) The new scientific spirit. Michigan: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  4. Badiou, A. ([1993] 1998). Is there a theory of the subject in Georges Canguilhem? Economy and Society, 27(2, 3), 225–233.Google Scholar
  5. Bitbol, M., Gayon, J. (sous la direction de). (2006). L’épistémologie française, 18301970. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  6. Braunstein, J. F. (2000). Canguilhem avant Canguilhem. Revue d’histoire des sciences, 53(10), 9–26.Google Scholar
  7. Canguilhem, G. (1937). Descartes et la technique. Oeuvres complètes, Volume I: Écrits philosophiques et politiques, 1926–1939 (pp. 490–498). Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  8. Canguilhem, G. (1938). Activité technique et création. Canguilhem, 2011, 499–511.Google Scholar
  9. Canguilhem G. (1958). “Qu’est-ce que la psychologie?”. In: Canguilhem 2002, pp. 365–381.Google Scholar
  10. Canguilhem, G. (1965). Knowledge of life. New York: Fordham University Press. 2008.Google Scholar
  11. Canguilhem, G. (1966). La Nouvelle Connaissance de la Vie: Le concept et la vie. In Canguilhem 2002, 335–364. (Partial English translation in Canguilhem 1994, pp. 303–320).Google Scholar
  12. Canguilhem, G. (1971). Logique du vivant et histoire de la biologie. Sciences—Revue de la civilisation scientifique, 71, 20–25.Google Scholar
  13. Canguilhem, G. (1989). Writings on medicine. New York: Fordham University Press. 2012.Google Scholar
  14. Canguilhem, G. (1994). A vital rationalist. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  15. Canguilhem, G. (2011). Oeuvres complètes, Volume I: Écrits philosophiques et politiques, 19261939. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  16. Canguilhem, G. ([1943 & 1966] 1991). The normal and the pathological. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  17. Canguilhem, G. ([1943 & 1966] 2006). Le normal et le pathologique. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  18. Canguilhem, G. ([1968] 2002). Etudes d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences (7ème édn.). Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  19. Canguilhem, G., & Planet, C. (1939). Traité de logique et de morale. Canguilhem, 2011, 632–924.Google Scholar
  20. Cooper, M. (2008). Life as surplus. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  21. Cranor, C. F. (Ed.). (1994). Are genes us? The social consequences of the new genetics. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dagognet, F. (1997). Georges Canguilhem: Philosophe de la vie. Le Plessis-Robinson: Institut Synthélabo.Google Scholar
  23. Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Debru, C., Morange, M., & Worms, F. (sous la direction de). (2012). Une nouvelle connaissance du vivant. Paris: Editions rue d’Ulm.Google Scholar
  25. Esposito, R. (2008). Bíos: Biopolitics and philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  26. Feest, T., & Sturm U. (Eds). (2011). Special issue on historical epistemology. Erkentnnis, 75(3), 285–302.Google Scholar
  27. Foucault, M. (1966). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. New York: Vintage Books. 1970b.Google Scholar
  28. Foucault, M. (1970a). Croître et multiplier. Le Monde, 8037(Novembre 15–16), 13. (In Foucault 2001a, pp. 967–972).Google Scholar
  29. Foucault, M., 1971a, “Nietzsche, la généalogie, l’histoire”, in Hommage à Jean Hyppolite (pp. 145–172). Paris: PUF. (English translation in Foucault 1977, pp. 139–164).Google Scholar
  30. Foucault, M. (1971b). Monstrosities in criticism. Diacritics, 1, 57–60. (Reprinted in French translation in: Foucault 2001a, pp. 1082–1091).Google Scholar
  31. Foucault, M. (1976a). Histoire de la sexualité (Vol. 1). La volonté de savoir, Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  32. Foucault, M. (1976b). Bio-histoire et bio-politique. Le Monde, #9869, Octobre 17–18 (p. 5). (Reprinted in Foucault 2001b, p. 95).Google Scholar
  33. Foucault, M. (1977). Language, counter-memory, practice, selected essays and interviews. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Foucault, M. (1978a). Introduction by Michel Foucault. in Canguilhem 1991. (Reprinted in French translation, Foucault 2001b, pp. 429–442).Google Scholar
  35. Foucault, M. (1978b). History of sexuality (Vol. 1). New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  36. Foucault, M. (1980). La vérite et le pouvoir. English translation in Foucault, 1980, 109–133.Google Scholar
  37. Foucault, M. (1985a). The history of sexuality (Vol. 2). New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  38. Foucault, M. (1985b). La vie: l’expérience et la science. Revue de métaphysique et de morale, 90(1)(Canguilhem, Janvier-Mars), 3–14. (Reprinted in Foucault 2001b, pp. 1582–1595).Google Scholar
  39. Foucault, M. (2001a). Dits et Écrits I. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  40. Foucault, M. (2001b). Dits et Écrits II. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  41. Foucault, M. (2003). Abnormal: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1974–1975. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
  42. Gayon, J. (1998). The concept of individuality in Georges Canguilhem’s philosophy of biology. Journal of the History of Biology, 31(3), 305–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Geroulanos, S., & Meyers, T. (2012). Introduction: Georges Canguilhem’s critique of medical reason. Canguilhem, 2012, 1–24.Google Scholar
  44. Gingras, Y. (2010). Naming without necessity: On the genealogy and uses of the label historical epistemology. Revue de Synthèse, 131(3), 439–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gordon, C. (1998). Canguilhem: Life, health, and death. Economy & Society, 27(2&3), 182–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gutting, G. (2001). French philosophy in the twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2004). Multitude. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  48. Jacob, F. (2002). Travaux scientifique. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
  49. Jacob, F. ([1970] 1973), The Logic of Life: A History of Heredity, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Jacob, F., Jakobson, R., Lévi-Strauss, C., L’Héritier, F., & Tréguer, M. (1968). Vivre et Parler, Les Lettres Françaises, 1221: 1–7, 1222: 4–5.Google Scholar
  51. Kant, I. (1763). Essai pour introduire en philosophie le concept de grandeur negative. Paris: Vrin. 1949.Google Scholar
  52. Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2012.Google Scholar
  53. Kevles, D. (1985). In the name of Eugenics. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  54. Le Blanc, G. (2010). Canguilhem et la vie humaine. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  55. Lecourt, D. (2008). Georges Canguilhem. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  56. Lemke, T. (2011). Biopolitics: An advanced introduction. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Limoges, C. (1994). Errare humanum est: Do genetic errors have a future? In C. F. Cranor (Ed.), Are genes us? The social consequences of the new genetics. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Macherey, P. (1998). In a materialist way. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  59. Marks, J. (2008). Michel Foucault: Biopolitics and Biology. Foucault in an age of terror (pp. 88–105). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  60. McWhorter, L. (2011). Racism and sexual oppression in Anglo-America. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Méthot, P. O. (2013). On the genealogy of concepts and experimental practices: Rethinking Georges Canguilhem’s historical epistemology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 44(1), 112–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Morange, M. (2008). Retour sur Le Normal et le pathologique. In: H. J. Han (sous la direction de), Philosophie et médecine. en hommage à Georges Canguilhem, Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  63. Morange, M. (1998). A history of molecular biology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Morange, M. (2000). Georges Canguilhem et la biologie du XXe siècle. Revue d’histoire des sciences, 53(10), 83–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Müller-Wille, S., & Rheinberger, H. J. (2012). A cultural history of heredity. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rabinow, P. (1998). French enlightenment: Truth and life. Economy & Society, 27(2&3), 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rheinberger, H. J. (2005). Gaston Bachelard and the notion of ‘Phenomenotechnique’. Perspectives on Science, 13(3), 313–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rheinberger, H. J. (2010). An epistemology of the concrete. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rose, N. (2007). The politics of life itself. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Sartre, J. P. ([1976]1943). L’être et le néant. essai d’ontologie phénoménologique. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  71. Schmidgen, H. (2008). Georges Canguilhem et «les discours allemands». In H. J. Han (sous la direction de), Philosophie et médecine. en hommage à Georges Canguilhem. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  72. Schmitt, S. (2012). Une nouvelle vision de l’histoire des sciences. In C. Debru, M. Morange, & F. Worms (sous la direction de), Une nouvelle connaissance du vivant. Paris: Editions rue d’Ulm.Google Scholar
  73. Worms, F. (2012). Canguilhem, Foucault, Jacob: Quel moment philosophique dans quel moment biologique?. In C. Debru, M. Morange, & F. Worms (sous la direction de), Une nouvelle connaissance du vivant. Paris: Editions rue d’Ulm.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of HumanitiesUniversity of the SciencesPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations