‫ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻋﺔ ﺳﺘﺎﻧﻔﻮﺭﺩ ﻟﻠﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬

‫ﻣﻴﺸﻴﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬
‫ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻒ ‪ :‬ﺟﺎﺭﻱ ﺟﻮﺗﻨﺞ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ‪ :‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺳﻌﺪ ﺃﻣﻴﻦ‬
‫‪1/1/2009‬‬

‫ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻨﺸﺮ ﻣﺤﻔﻮﻇﺔ ﻟﻤﻮﺳﻮﻋﺔ ﺳﺘﺎﻧﻔﻮﺭﺩ ﻟﻠﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ©‬
‫© ‪Copyrights reserved to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﻮﺭ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﺭﺷﻴﻒ ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻋﺔ ﺳﺘﺎﻧﻔﻮﺭﺩ ﻟﻠﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻦ ﻣﻴﺸﻴﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺑﻂ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ‪:‬‬
‫‪http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/foucault/‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺮﺟﻤﺔ "ﺍﻷﺭﺷﻴﻔﻴﺔ" ﻗﺪ ﺗﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮﺩﺓ ﺣﺎﻟﻴﺎً ﺣﻴﺚ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻱ ﻭﻗﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﺬﻩ ﻫﻲ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻘﺎﻝ ﺑﺂﺧﺮ ﺗﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﺑﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ‪ 17‬ﺳﺒﺘﻤﺒﺮ ‪ 2008‬ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻝ ﻣﻨﺸﻮﺭ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺑﻂ‬
‫‪http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/foucault/‬‬

‫ﺷﻜﺮ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻟﻜﻼ ﻣﻦ ‪:‬‬

‫ﺟﺎﺭﻱ ﺟﻮﺗﻨﺞ ‪ :‬ﺃﺳﺘﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺑﺠﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﻧﻮﺗﺮﺩﺍﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﺇﺩﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻥ‪ .‬ﺯﺍﻟﺘﺎ ‪ :‬ﻣﺪﻳﺮ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﺮ ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻋﺔ ﺳﺘﺎﻧﻔﻮﺭﺩ ﻟﻠﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻴﺌﺔ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﺮ ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻋﺔ ﺳﺘﺎﻧﻔﻮﺭﺩ ﻟﻠﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻣﻨﺢ ﺍﻹﺫﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺮﺟﻤﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪Special thanks to:‬‬
‫‪Gary Gutting‬‬
‫‪Professor of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame‬‬
‫‪Edward N. Zalta‬‬
‫‪Principal Editor: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy‬‬
‫‪The Editors of (SEP) for granting the permission to translate and publish the article.‬‬

Dedication
To the one who wished me a lot of Obstacles while reading
Foucault, to the one who learned me that reading
philosophy is about looking for obstacles not avoiding
them, to the one who learned me that the real pleasure in
reading is about to be a Mazochist.

To Chrysanthi Nigianni i dedicate this
translation, my first long translation.

‫ﻣﻴﺸﻴﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﺸﻴﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ )‪ ( 1984 – 1926‬ﻣﺆﺭﺥ ﻭﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻓﺮﻧﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺗﺒﻂ ﺍﺳﻤﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﻣﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﻮﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﻟﻪ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺳﻊ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻓﻘﻂ ) ﻭﻻ ﺡﺗﻲ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ ( ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺃﻳﻀﺎ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻧﻄﺎﻕ ﻭﺍﺳﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺨﺼﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻹﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫•‬
‫•‬
‫•‬

‫•‬

‫•‬

‫•‬

‫‪ .1‬ﺳﻴﺮﺓ ﺫﺍﺗﻴﺔ‬
‫‪. 2‬ﺧﻠﻔﻴﺔ ﻓﻜﺮﻳﺔ‬
‫‪ .3‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻠﻌﻘﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺨﻲ‬
‫‪ 3.1 o‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ‬
‫‪ 3.2 o‬ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ‬
‫‪ 3.3 o‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻦ‬
‫‪ 3.4 o‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ‬
‫‪ .4‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ‬
‫‪ 4.1 o‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ‬
‫‪ 4.2 o‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ﻟﻠﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ‬
‫‪ 4.3 o‬ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻭ"ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ"‬
‫‪ 4.4 o‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ‬
‫‪ .5‬ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺍﺟﻊ‬

‫‪ .1‬ﺳﻴﺮﺓ ﺫﺍﺗﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻟﺪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻮﺍﺗﻴﻴﻪ ‪ Poitiers‬ﺑﻔﺮﻧﺴﺎ ﻓﻲ ‪ 15‬ﺃﻛﺘﻮﺑﺮ ‪ 1926‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻀﻄﺮﺑﺔ ﻧﻔﺴﻴﺎً ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﺃﻇﻬﺮ ﺗﻔﻮﻗﺎً‬
‫ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻮﻱ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﻲ ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﺃ ﻓﻲ ﺩﺧﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺎﺓ ﺍﻷﻛﺎﺩﻳﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺣﻘﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺘﻴﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺷﻐﻞ ﻋﺪﺓ ﻣﻨﺎﺻﺐ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻴﺔ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺇﻧﺘﺨﺎﺑﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪ 1969‬ﻛﺄﺳﺘﺎﺫ ﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﻣﻮﻗﺔ " ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻟﻴﺞ ﺩﻱ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺲ " ﺣﺘﻲ ﻭﻓﺎﺗﻪ ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﺧﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻮﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺬ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ‪ 1970‬ﺃﺻﺒﺢ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻧﺎﺷﻄﺎً ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻮﻱ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﺳﺲ ﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ d'information sur les prisons‬ﻭﺗﻈﺎﻫﺮ ﺩﻓﺎﻋﺎً ﻋﻦ ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﻠﻴﻴﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﺸﺔ ﺍﻷﺧﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﺿﺮ‬
‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻛﺜﻴﺮﺍً ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻓﺮﻧﺴﺎ ﻭﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﻭﻓﻲ ‪ 1983‬ﻭﺍﻓﻖ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺪﺭﺱ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺳﻨﻮﻱ ﻓﻲ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻟﻴﻔﻮﺭﻧﻴﺎ ﺑﺒﻴﺮﻛﻠﻲ‪ .‬ﻫﻮ ﺿﺤﻴﺔ ﻣﺒﻜﺮﺓ ﻟﻤﺮﺽ ﺍﻹﻳﺪﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﻓﻲ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﻲ ‪ 25‬ﻳﻮﻧﻴﻮ ‪ .1984‬ﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ ﻷﻋﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻢ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺮﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻢ ﻧﺸﺮ ﻣﺤﺎﺿﺮﺍﺗﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻟﻴﺞ ﺩﻱ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺲ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻭﻓﺎﺗﻪ ﻭﻫﻲ ﺗﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺤﺎﺕ ﻭﺇﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﺕ ﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭﻩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺼﻌﺐ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﻓﻲ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻛﻔﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ‪ .‬ﻓﺘﻜﻮﻳﻨﻪ ﺍﻷﻛﺎﺩﻳﻤﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﺎﻝ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ﻭﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻪ ﺑﻨﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺒﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻟﺐ ﻫﻲ ﺗﻮﺍﺭﻳﺦ ﻝﻝﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻹ ﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺷﻐﻔﻪ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺃﺩﺑﻴﺎً ﻭﺳﻴﺎﺳﻴﺎً ﻭﻣﻊ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﻜﻞ‬
‫‪ :‬ﻛﺈﺿﻄﻼﻉ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﺜﻤﺮﺓ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻴﺎً ﺇﺫﺍ ﻗﺮﺃﺕ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺃﺣﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﻴﻦ ﺃﻭ ﻛﻼﻫﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪﻱ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻱ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻧﻤﻂ )ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻲ( ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻭ ﻛﻨﻘﺪ ﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﻼﺳﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﻴﻦ‪ .‬ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻝ ﺳﻮﻑ‬
‫ﻳﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﻛﻔﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻫﺬﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺪﻳﻦ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .2‬ﺧﻠﻔﻴﺔ ﻓﻜﺮﻳﺔ‬
‫)ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻨﺒﺪﺃ ﺑﻠﻮﺣﺔ ﺗﺨﻄﻴﻄﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺸﻬﺪ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺗﻠﻘﻲ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺇﻟﺘﺤﻖ ﺑﺎﻻﻳﻜﻮﻝ ﺩﻱ ﻧﻮﺭﻣﺎﻝ ﺳﻮﺑﺮﻳﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻹﻧﻄﻼﻕ ﻟﻜﻞ ﺍﻟﻔﻼﺳﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻴﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﺎﺭ ( ﻓﻲ ﻋﺎﻡ ‪ 1946‬ﺣﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﻨﻮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺫﻭﺭﺗﻬﺎ ‪ .‬ﺣﻀﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺎﺿﺮﺍﺕ ﻟﻤﻴﺮﻟﻮﺑﻮﻧﺖﻱ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﺪﺟﺮ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﻬﻤﺎً ﻟﻪ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻮﺹ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﺠﻞ ﻭﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻛﺎﻧﺎ ﺇﻫﺘﻤﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻋﺮﻑ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺷﺮﻭﺡ ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻗﺪﻣﻬﺎ ﺟﺎﻥ ﻫﻴﺒﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﻭﺍﻷﺧﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺃﻟﺘﻮﺳﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻗﺪﻡ‬
‫ﻗﺮﺍءﺓ ﺑﻨﻴﻮﻳﺔ ﻟﻤﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﻛﻼ ﺍﻷﺳﺘﺎﺫﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻟﻬﻢ ﺍ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻛﺒﻴﺮ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻹﻳﻜﻮﻝ ﻧﻮﺭﻣﺎﻝ ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﺟﺌﺎً ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻜﺮﺓ )"ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺘﻪ" ﺍﻟﻄﻮﻳﻠﺔ ﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ‪ Dream and Existence‬ﻟﻠﻮﺩﻓﻴﺞ ﺑﻨﺴﻔﺎﻧﺠﺮ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﺐ ﻧﻔﺴﻲ‬
‫ﻫﻴﺪﺟﺮﻱ ﻭ ﺍﻷﻣﺮﺍﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻴﺔ ‪ Maladie mentale et personalité‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻗﺼﻴﺮ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻲ‬
‫( ﻕﺩ ﻛﺘﺒﺖ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺇﺣﺘﺮﺍﻣﻪ ﻟﻠﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﺗﺤﻮﻝ ﻋﻨﻪ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺣﺎﺳﻢ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺑﺒﻌﻴﺪﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺣﻴﺎﺓ ﺳﺎﺭﺗﺮ ﻭﺃﻋﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﻲ‪ ،‬ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻟﻬﻤﺎ ﺃﻱ ﺕﺃﺛﻴﺮ ﺷﺨﺼﻲ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥ ﻓﻜﺮﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺳﻴﻄﺮ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻲ ﺍﻝﺳﺎﺑﻖ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﺎً ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺨﻠﻔﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻛﺴﺎﺭﺗﺮ ﺑﺪﺃ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﻦ ﻛﺮﺍﻫﻴﺔ ﺷﺪﻳﺪﺓ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﺟﻮﺍﺯﻱ ﻭﺛﻘﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭﺑﺘﻌﺎﻃﻒ ﻋﻔﻮﻱ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻪ ﻣﺸﺔ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺟﻮﺍﻧﺐ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﺟﻮﺍﺯﻱ )ﺍﻟﻔﻨﺎﻧﻴﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺜﻠﻴﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻨﺎء‪...‬ﺇﻟﺦ( ﻛﻤﺎ ﺃﻧﻬﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺎ ﻣﺘﺸﺎﺑﻬﻴﻦ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻫﺘﻤﺎﻣﻬﻢ ﺑﺎﻷﺩﺏ ﻭﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ﻛﺈﻫﺘﻤﺎﻣﻬﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻛﻼﻫﻤﺎ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً‬
‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﻋﺰﻭﻑ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻹ ﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﺃﺻﺒﺢ ﻧﺎﺷﻄﺎً ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻗﻮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﺎﻳﺔ ﺑﺪﺍ ﺃﻥ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﺼﺮﺍً ﻋﻠﻲ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻱ ﺍﻟﺬﺍ ﺕ ﻋﻦﺩ ﺳﺎﺭﺗﺮ ) ﻭﺍﻟﺖﻱ ﺳﺨﺮ ﻣﻨﻪ ﺍ ﺑﻘﻮﻟﻪ ﺇﻧﻬﺎ "ﻧﺮﺟﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺓ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻝﺻﻌﻴﺪ ﺍﻝﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺭﻓﺾ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺑﻠﺔ ﻣﻊ ﺳﺎﺭﺗﺮ ‪ .‬ﻑ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ" ( ﻭﻋﻠﻲ ﺻﻌﻴﺪ ﺷﺨﺼﻲ ﻭﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ‪ ،‬ﺭﻓﺾ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺳﺎﺭﺗﺮ "ﻛﻤﻔﻜﺮ ﻋﺎﻟﻤﻲ"ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﺤﻜﻢ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻌﺎﺕ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﻣﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻴﺔ ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺻﺒﻐﺔ ﻗﻮﻳﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﺮﺍﺽ ﺍﻟﺸﺪﻳﺪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻠﺘﺒﺎﻋﺪ ﻋﻦ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺭﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺠﻌﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﺆﺍﻝ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺎﺗﻬﻢ ﻳﻈﻞ ﺳﺆﺍﻻً ﺧﺼﺒﺎً‪.‬‬
‫ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﻋﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺃﺧﺮﻱ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺇﻳﺠﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﻟﺸﺎ ﺏ‪ .‬ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﺙ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻭﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻗﺪﻣﻪ ﺟﻮﺭﺝ ﻛﺎﻧﺠﻴﻠﻬﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﺃﺣﺪ ﺍﻟﺮﻣﻮﺯ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺆﺛﺮﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺄﺳﻴﺲ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻗﺪﻣﺖ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺎﺗﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻭﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺟﺎً ﻟﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻤﺎ ﺳﻴﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ‪ .‬ﺃﺷﺮﻑ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻥﺟﻴﻠﻬﺎﻡ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻃﺮﻭﺣﺔ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻠﺪﻛﺘﻮﺭﺍﺓ "ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ " ﻭﻇﻞ ﺃﺣﺪ ﺃﻫﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻳﺪﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺻﺮﻳﻦ ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻣﺴﻴﺮﺗﻪ‬
‫‪1‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﻛﺎﻧﺠﻴﻠﻬﺎﻡ ﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ) ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﻃﻮﺭﻩ ﻣﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺎﺕ ﺑﺎﺷﻼﺭ ( ﺯﻭﺩ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﺤﺲ ﻗﻮﻱ )ﻛﻮﻧﻲ‬
‫‪ (avant la lettre‬ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻄﺎﺋﻊ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺑﺎﻻﺿﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻲ ﻓﻬﻢ "ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻲ" ﻟﻠﺪﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺨﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻔﺎﻫﻲﻡ ﺟﻌﻠﻪ ﻡ ﻫﺬﺍ‬
‫ﻡ ﺗﺤﺮﺭﻳﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﻨﻮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ ‪ .‬ﻭﻭﺟﺪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺪﻋﻢ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻔﻬﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﻮﻳﺎﺕ ﻭﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﻠﺬﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻃﻮﺭﻫﻤﺎ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﻨﺎﻧﺪ ﺩﻱ ﺳﻮﺳﻴﺮ ﻭﺟﺎﻙ ﻻﻛﺎﻥ ﻭﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺝ ﻭﺭﺝ ﺩﻭﻣﺰﻳﻞ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﻮﻱ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﻣﻦ ﻧﻮﻋﻪ ﻓﻲ )ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻥ(‪ ،‬ﻛﻞ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺍﻗﻒ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﺩﺓ ﻟﻠﺬﺍﺗﻴﺔ ﺃﻭﺟﺪﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﻕ ﻟﺘﻬﻤﻴﺶ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻠﺬﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ "ﺗﻮﺍﺭﻳﺨﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﻮﻳﺔ"‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﻼﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺎﺩﺓ‬
‫) ﻓﻲ ﺃﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻄﺐ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ( ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء ) ﻓﻲ ﺃﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ (‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻋﻠﻲ ﻣﻨﻮﺍﻝ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻣﺦ ﺗﻠﻒ ﺗﺄﺛﺮ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﻄﻠﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻷﺩﺏ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻲ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺎﺕ ﺟﻮﺭﺝ ﺑﺎﺗﺎﻱ ﻭﺑﻼﻧﺶ ﻭ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻭﺟﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﻨﻮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﺤﺎﻃﺔ ﺑﺈﻓﺘﺮﺍﺿﺎﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻴﺔ ﻣﺸﺒﻮﻫﻪ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺗﻴﺔ ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻹﺳﺘﺤﻀﺎﺭ ﺍﻷﺩﺑﻲ "ﻟﻞﺧﺒﺮﺍﺕ – ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ" ﻣﻤﺎ ﻳﺪﻓﻌﻨﺎ ﻟﻠﻨﻘﻴﻀﻴﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﺒﺪﺃ ﺍﻟﻔﺌﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻬﻢ ‪ 2‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻘﻮﻁ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 1‬ﻧﺴﺒﺔ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ ﻛﻮﻥ ﻭﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻪ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﺎﺋﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺤﺪﺙ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﺎﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ "‪ "Paradigms‬ﻛﺎﻟﻘﻄﻴﻌﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﺰﻳﺎء‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻴﻮﺗﻮﻧﻴﺔ ﻭﻓﻴﺰﻳﺎء ﺇﻳﻨﺸﺘﺎﻳﻦ‪] .‬ﺟﻤﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻬﻮﺍﻣﺶ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺮﺟﻢ[‬
‫‪ 2‬ﻫﻲ ﻓﺌﺎﺕ ﺗﺼﻨﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﻟﻺﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺗﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﺠﻌﻞ ﺍﻹﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﻗﺎﺑﻼً ﻟﻠﻔﻬﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺄﻟﻮﻓﺎً ﻹﺩﺭﺍﻛﻨﺎ ﻭﻣﻌﺎﺭﻓﻨﺎ )ﺑﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻞ ﺗﺼﺒﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻳﺔ ﻭﺧﺎﺿﻌﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﻴﺔ‪/‬ﺍﻹﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ( ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﻛﻠﻬﺎ ﺗﻘﻮﻡ ﻭﺗﺘﻄﻮﺭ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻔﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻴﺎﺭﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻬﻢ‪.‬‬

‫ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺃﻣﺪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻨﺎﺥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻴﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺗﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻢ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺞ "ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ"‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺞ "ﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻲ" ﻓﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﻌﻠﻦ ﻋﻦ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻧﺘﺤﻮﻝ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﻵﻥ‪.‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻠﻌﻘﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺨﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺬ ﺑﺪﺍﻳﺎﺗﻬﺎ ﻣﻊ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ‪ ،‬ﺇﻧﺨﺮﻃﺖ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﻣﺴﺎءﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻣﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺒﻮﻟﺔ‪ ،‬ﻻﺣﻘﺎً ﻗﺎﻡ ﻟﻮﻙ ﻭﻫﻴﻮﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺧﺎﺻﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ﺑﺘﻄﻮﻳﺮ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﻣﻤﻴﺰﺓ ﺣﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﺃﻻ ﻭﻫﻲ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﻤﻦ ﺍﻹﺑﺘﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ ﻟﻜﺎﻧﻂ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻧﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻧﻔﺲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻛﺸﻒ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﻴﺔ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻪ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﺸﻒ ﻟﻨﺎ ﻋﻦ ﺷﺮﻭﻁ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻳﺔ ﻹﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟﻬﺎ ‪ ،‬ﻓﻤﺎ ﻗﺪ ﺑﺪﺕ ﻟﻨﺎ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﺳﻤﺎﺕ ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺮﻳﺔ ) ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻄﺎﺑﻊ ﺍﻟﺰﻣﺎﻧﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻜﺎﻧﻲ ﻟﻸﺷﻴﺎء ( ﺗﻨﻘﻠﺐ ﻟﺘﺼﺒﺢ ﺣﻘﺎﺉﻕ‬
‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻳﻘﺘﺮﺡ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻗﻠﺐ ﻟﺘﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﻮﺓ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻧﻄﻴﺔ ﻭﺑﺪﻻً ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻧﺴﺄﻝ ﻣﺎﻫﻮ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻀﺮﻭﺭﻱ ﻓﻲﻣﺎ ﻳﺒﺪﻭ ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺎً‪ ،‬ﻳﻘﺘﺮﺡ ﻫﻮ ﺃﻥ ﻧﺴﺄﻝ ﻣﺎﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻦ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻗﺪ ﻳﺒﺪﻭ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻳﺎً‪ ،‬ﺇﻥ ﻡ ﺍ ﻳﺮﻛﺰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺗﺴﺎﺅﻝ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬
‫ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ) ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻜﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ( ﻓﺘﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺗﺮﻣﻲ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﺣﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﻋﻠﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻛﻮﻧﻴﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺮﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻫﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﻻ ﺗﺰﻳﺪ ﻉ ﻥ ﻛﻮﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﺠﺮﺩﺓ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻻﻟﺘﺰﺍﻣﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻷﺧﻼﻗﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ‪ " .‬ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪﻳﺔ " ﺍﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮﻟﺪﻳﺔ ﺗﻘﻮﺽ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻤﺰﺍﻋﻢ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺗﻌﺮﺽ ﻟﻨﺎ ﻛﻴﻒ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻤﺰﺍﻋﻢ‬
‫ﻣﺠﺮﺩ ﻧﻮﺍﺗﺞ ﻟﻘﻮﻱ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺔ ﻭﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺣﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﻋﻠﻤﻴﺎً‪.‬‬

‫‪ 3.1‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﺍﻷﻛﺜﺮ ﺑﺮﻭﺯﺍً ﻋﻠﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻢ ﻁ ﻓﻲ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻫﻮ ﺃﻭﻝ ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﺮﻱ "ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ "‬
‫)‪ (1961‬ﻧﺸﺄ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﻷﻛﺎﺩﻳﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ) ﻟﻴﺴﺎﻧﺲ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ‪ 1949‬ﻭ ﺩﺑﻠﻮﻣﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻠﻢ‬
‫ﺍﻷﻣﺮﺍﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ ‪ ( 1952‬ﻭﺃﺛﻨﺎء ﻋﻤﻠﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺼﺤﺔ ﻧﻔﺴﻴﺔ ﺑﺒﺎﺭﻳﺲ ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﻛﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﺠﺰء ﺍﻷﻛﺒﺮ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﻫﺠﺮﺗﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺮﺝ ) ‪ ( 1959 – 1955‬ﻭﺗﻌﺎﻗﺒﻪ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺷﻐﻞ ﻭﻇﺎﺋﻒ ﺩﺑﻠﻮﻣﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻭﺗﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻮﻳﺪ ﻭﺃﻟﻤﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﻭﺑﻮﻟﻨﺪﺍ ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻮ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻟﻈﻬﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ "ﻟﻠﻤﺮﺽ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻠﻲ" ﻓﻲ ﺃﻭﺭﻭﺑﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﻷﺭﺷﻴﻔﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻀﺨﻢ ﻭﺳﺨﻄﻪ ﺍﻟﺸﺪﻳﺪ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺁﻩ ﻛﻨﻔﺎﻕ ﺃﺥ ﻻﻗﻲ ﻟﻠﻄﺐ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﺭﺃﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺳﻊ ﻋﺸﺮ ) ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻄﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻦ ﺇﺻﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﻨﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻓﺮﻧﺴﺎ ﻭﺍﻷﺧﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻮﻙ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻧﺠﻠﺘﺮﺍ ( ﻛﺘﺤﺮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻨﻴﺮ ﻟﻠﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﻞ ﻭﻭﺣﺸﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺤﺴﺐ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﺎﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻖ ﺍﺋﻠﺔ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻫﻮ‬
‫ﻣﺮﻳﺾ ﻓﺤﺴﺐ )ﻣﺮﻳﺾ "ﻋﻘﻠﻴﺎً"( ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﺣﺘﻴﺎﺝ ﻟﻌﻼﺝ ﻃﺒﻲ ﻟﻢ ﺗﻜﻦ ﺗﻄﻮﻳﺮﺍً ﻭﺍﺿﺤﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﻔﺎ ﻩ ﻳﻢ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﻃﻼﻕ‬
‫)ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﻋﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺇﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺏﺍﻝﻗﻮﻱ ﺍﻟﺨﻔﻴﺔ ﻝﻟﻤﺄﺳﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻧﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺮﻧﻴﻦ ‪ 18 – 17‬ﻟﻠﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻧﺒﺬ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻞ ( ﻋﻼﻭﺓ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮ ﻳﺠﺎﺩﻝ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺰﻋﻮﻡ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﻨﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮ ﻣﺠﺮﺩ ﻏﻄﺎء ﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺎﺕ ﺣﺎﺳﻤﺔ ﻟﻸﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﻟﺒﺮﺟﻮﺍﺯﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﺑﺈﺧﺘﺼﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻳﺠﺎﺩﻝ ﺑﺄﻥ ﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻢ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﻤﻪ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻲ‪ ،‬ﺇﻛﺘﺸﺎﻑ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﻻ ﺝ ﺩﺍﻝ ﻓﻴﻪ )ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺮﺽ ﻋﻘﻠﻲ ( ﻛﺎﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻣﻨﺘﺞ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺸﻜﻮﻙ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺭﺯﺓ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺍﻹﻟﺘﺰﺍﻣﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﺧﻼﻗﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺻﻮﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﻟﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺎﺩﺓ )‪ (1963‬ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻘﺮﺃ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﻛﻨﻘﺪ ﻟﻠﻄﺐ ﺍﻹﻛﻠﻴﻨﻴﻜﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ ‪ -‬ﺍﻷﺧﻼﻗﻲ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻳﺨﺘﻔﻲ ) ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻋﺪﺍ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻃﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﻴﻔﺔ ( ﻭﻳﻔﺘﺮﺽ ﺃﻥ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺽﻭﻋﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻄﺐ )ﺑﻌﻜﺲ ﺍﻟﻄﺐ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻲ ( ﻣﻤﺎ ﻳﻘﻠﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﻳﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻛﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻟﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻗﺮﺏ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﻟﻠﻌﻠﻢ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻛﺎﻧﺠﻴﻠﻬﺎﻡ ﻟﻠﻤﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻧﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﻴﻒ ﻟﻠﻔﻴﻨﻮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ‬
‫ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ )ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء( ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺇﺛﺎﺭﺓ ﻟﻠﺠﺪﻝ ﻟﻨﻘﺪﻩ‬
‫)ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﺔ( ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻟﺘﻌﻘﻴﺪﻩ ﻭﺩﻗﺔ ﻧﻘﺪﻩ ﻟﻠﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻳﻌﻮﺩ ﺑﻜﻞ ﻗﻮﺗﻪ ﻣﺮﺓ ﺍﺧﺮﻱ ﻟﻠﻨﻘﺪ ﺍﻹﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻲ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺭﺍﻗﺐ ﻭﻋﺎﻗﺐ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 3.2‬ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ‬
‫ﺭﺍﻗﺐ ﻭﻋﺎﻗﺐ ﻳﺤﺪﺩ ﺍﻹﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻲ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺼﻔﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻠﻘﻮﻥ ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺣﻠﺔ "ﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ" ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎﺑﻠﺔ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺣﻠﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ "ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ" ‪ .‬ﻓﻲ ‪ 1969‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺣﻔﺮﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻭﻫﻮ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺗﺼﻮﻍ ﺑﻮﺿﻮﺡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻈﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺨﻲ "ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ" ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﻟﺪ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺎﺩﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻑ ]ﺍﻹﺑﺴﺘﻤﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،3‬ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﺑﻤﺼﻄﻠﺤﺎﺕ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ[‬
‫ﺓ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻜﻮﻣﺔ ﺑﻘﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻭﺭﺍء ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﻨﺤﻮ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﻄﻖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻤﻞ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻭﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﺬﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻳﺔ ﻭﺗﺤﺪﺩ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺤﺪﺩ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﻣﺠﺎﻝ ﻭﻓﺘﺮﺓ ﺯﻣﻨﻴﺔ ﻣﻌﻄﺎﻩ ‪ .‬ﻟﺬﺍ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻳﺠﺐ ‪ ،‬ﻳﺆﻛﺪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪،‬‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻳﻘﺮﺃ ﻛﺤﻔﺮ ﻋﻘﻠﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺟﺬﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺣﻜﻤﺖ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﻓﻲ ‪/‬ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﻮﻥ ﻣﻨﺬ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻊ‬
‫ﻋﺸﺮ ﺍﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺳﻊ ﻋﺸﺮ )ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺿﺢ‪ ،‬ﺃ ﻥ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﻪ ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ ﻗﺪ ﺗﻢ ﺗﺨﻄﻴﻄﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﻜﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻢ ﺗﻄﻮﻳﺮﻩ ﺑﺎﻟﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء(‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻨﻬﺠﺎً ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻴﺎً ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﻋﻤﺖ ﺗﺄﺭﻳﺨﺎً ﻻ ﻳﺘﻜﺊ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﺬﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﺩﻳﺔ ; ﻓﻘﺪ ﻣﻜﻨﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺆﺭﺥ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻣﺴﺘﻮﻱ ﻻ ﺷﻌﻮﺭﻱ ﺣﻞ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺃﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﻨﻮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺄﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻱ ‪ .‬ﻭﻣﻊ ﺫﻟﻚ‬
‫ﻓﺎﻟﻘﻮﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﺪﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﻀﺎﺭﺑﺔ ﻟﻸﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﺗﻢ ﺣﺼﺮﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻧﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻷﺯﻣﻨﺔ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ‪ .‬ﺗﻠﻚ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺭﻧﺎﺕ ﺗﻮﺣﻲ ﺑﺈﺣﺘﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﻣﻊ ﻁﺍﻩ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺇﻇﻬﺎﺭﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻗﺪ ﻓﻜﺮﺕ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‬
‫ﻛﺚﻳﺮﺍً )ﻭﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺿﺢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻔﻌﺎﻟﻴﻪ ﺃﻛﺒﺮ (‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻞﻳﻞ ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺮﺩ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺃﻱ ﺷﻴﺊ ﻋﻦ ﺃﺳﺒﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻮﻝ ﻣﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻲ ﺃﺧﺮﻱ ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﺭﺑﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﺠﺒﺮﺍً ﻋﻠﻲ ﺗﺠﺎﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻷﻛﺜﺮ ﺇﻟﺤﺎﺣﺎً ﻭﻫﻲ ﺇﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻷﻭﺿﺎﻉ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺻﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺮﺳﺨﺔ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻄﺒﻖ ﻓﻲ ﺭﺍﻗﺐ ﻭﻋﺎﻗﺐ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩﺍً ﻣﻨﻪ ﺇﺻﻼﺡ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﻮﺭ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﺭﺍﺩ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻤﺼﻄﻠﺢ "ﺟﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ" ﺍﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻋﺎء ﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﺍﻻﺧﻼﻕ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻧﻴﺘﺸﻪ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﻣﻊ ﺗﻠﻤﻴﺤﻬﺎ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻘﺪﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺪﻧﻴﻮﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺸﺎﺋﻨﺔ ‪ -‬ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺑﺄﻱ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﺣﻮﺍﻝ ﺟﺰء ﻣﻦ ﺃﻱ ﻣﺨﻄﻂ ﻛﺒﻴﺮ ﻟﻠﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﺪﻣﻲ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻬﺪﻑ‬
‫) ﻫﻮ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻗﺪ ﻛﺶُ ﻑ ﻋﻦ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺗﻪ ﺍﻷﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻲ ‪ .‬ﺃﻥ ﻳﺒﻴﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﻣﻌﻄﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻟﻠﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻴﺲ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻹﺕﺟﺎﻫﺎﺕ ﻋﻘﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺭﻛﻴﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻳﻈﻞ ﺟﺰءﺍً ﻣﻦ ﺗﺄﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ( ﻛﺎﻥ ﻧﺘﺎﺝﺍً ﻟﺘﺤﻮﻻﺕ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺘﻮﻣﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 3.3‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻦ‬
‫ﺭﺍﻗﺐ ﻭﻋﺎﻗﺐ )‪ (1975‬ﻫﻮ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺟﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﻄﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻄﺮ ﻱﻗﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ "ﺍﻷﻟﻄﻒ" ﻟﺴﺠﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺮﻣﻴﻦ ﺑﺪﻻً ﻣﻦ ﺗﻌﺬﻳﺒﻬﻢ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﻗﺘﻠﻬﻢ‪ .‬ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﺑﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺼﺮ ﺍﻻﺻﻼﺣﻲ ﺍﻷﺻﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻢ ﺳﺘﻨﻲﺭ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻳﺆﻛﺪ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻳﺼﺒﺢ‬
‫ﺑﻬﺎ ﺇﺻﻼﺡ ﻛﻬﺬﺍ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﺍﻛﺜﺮ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ‪ " :‬ﺃﻥ ﺗﻌﺎﻗﺐ ﺃﻗﻞ‪ ،‬ﺭﺑﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻛﺪ ﺃﻥ ﻙ ﺗﻌﺎﻗﺐ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﻓﻀﻞ "‬
‫ﻳﻤﻀﻲ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻷﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﻴﺠﺎﺩﻝ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻷﺳﻠﻮﺏ ﺍﻟﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺎﻗﺒﺔ ﻳﺘﺤﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻲ ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻟﻠﺴﻴﻄﺮﺓ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﻛﻜﻞ ﺑﺄﻥ‬
‫ﻳﺘﻢ ﺑﻨﺎء ﺍﻝﻣﺼﺎﻧﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﻔﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺪﺍﺭﺱ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻏﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻻ ﻳﺠﺐ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻴﻨﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻳﻌﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﻲ ﻗﺮﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺻﺮﻳﺤﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻳﺔ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﺔ ‪ .‬ﻭﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺟﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻳﻈﻬﺮﻧﺎ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺗﻄﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺆﺳﺴﺎﺕ ﻷﺳﺒﺎﺏ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻭﺃﻏﺮﺍﺽ ﺑﺮﻳﺌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻟﺐ‪،‬‬
‫ﻟﺘﺘﻘﺎﺭﺏ ﻣﻜﻮﻧﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺻﻮﺭﺓ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻝﻣﺠﺘﻤﻊ "ﺍﻝﺭﻗﺎﺑﻲ" ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﺗﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻜﻢ ‪ :‬ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ ﻫﻴﺮﺍﺭﻛﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺣﻜﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺺ‪.‬‬
‫‪ 3‬ﺍﻻﺑﺴﺘﻤﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﺎﺻﺮﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺣﻘﺒﺔ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺓ ﻟﻠﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺗﺘﺒﺪﻱ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻧﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺧﻄﺎﺏ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻲ ﺣﺪ ﺑﻌﻴﺪ ﻑﺇﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ )ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ( ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﻪ ﺑﻤﺠﺮﺩ ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﺘﻬﻢ ﻓﺤﺴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﺻﻔﻮﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺪﺭﺟﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺳﺘﺎﺩ ﻣﺎ ﻻ ﺗﺴﻬﻞ ﺍﻟﺮﺅﻳﺔ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺎﻫﺪﻳﻦ ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﺍﺱ ﻭﻛﺎﻣﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ ﺃﻳﻀﺎٌ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺑﻤﺴﺢ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻔﺮﺟﻴﻦ ‪ .‬ﺇﻥ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﺎً ﻣﺜﺎﻟﻴﺎً ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ ﻗﺪ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺣﺎﺭﺳﺎً ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺍً ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻦ ﺭﺅﻳﺔ ﻛﻞ ﺷﻴﺊ ) ﻫﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻳﻘﺘﺮﺏ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻨﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻧﻘﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺟﻴﺮﻳﻤﻲ ﺑﻨﺘﺎﻡ "ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻧﻮﺑﺘﻴﻜﻮﻥ" ( ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺑﻤﺎ ﺍﻥ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﻓﻬﻨﺎﻙ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺟﺔ "ﻟﺘﻨﺎﻭﺏ" ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﻴﻦ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻫﻴﺮﺍﺭﻛﻲ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﻤﺮﺭ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒٍﻴﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻮﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﻔﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻮﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻤﺔ ﻣﻤﻴﺰﺓ ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ )ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﺍﻹﻧﻀﺒﺎﻃﻲ ‪ (4‬ﻩ ﻭ ﺍﻫﺘﻤﺎﻣﻬﺎ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻔﻌﻠﻪ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ )ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻴﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻥ( ﻭﻫﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻓﺸﻞ ﺷﺨﺺ ﻣﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺻﻮﻝ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻄﻠﻮﺑﺔ ‪ .‬ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﻳﺠﺴﺪ ﺍﻟﻬﺪﻑ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻲ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ‪ :‬ﺗﻘﻮﻳﻢ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻮﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺤﺮﻑ ; ﺍﻟﻬﺪﻑ ﻟﻴﺲ ﺍﻻﻧﺘﻘﺎﻡ )ﻛﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻝ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺬﻳﺐ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﺎﺑﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻢ( ﻭﺇﻧﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺻﻼﺡ‪ ،‬ﻭﺑﺎﻟﻄﺒﻊ ﺍﻻﺻﻼﺡ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻴﺶ ﻭﻓﻘﺎً ﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ ﻭﻗﻮ ﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺩﻳﺐ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ‬
‫)"ﺍﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻊ"( ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺎً ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺎﻡ ﺍﻷﻗﺪﻡ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺎﻗﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻱ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻛﻞ ﻓﻌﻞ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺘﻪ ﺃ ﻭ‬
‫"ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻴﻴﻦ" ﺃﻡ "ﻏﻴﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻴﻴﻦ "‪ ،‬ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻊ‬
‫ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺘﻪ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﻭﻻ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻫﺆﻻء ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻜﻮﻣﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻐﻠﻐﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﺘﻤﻌﻨﺎ ‪ :‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺒﺮﺍﻣﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﻠﻤﻤﺎﺭﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﻠﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺼﻨﺎﻋﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺺ )ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻟﻠﺘﻼﻣﻴﺬ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺪﺭﺳﺔ ﺃﻭ ﻟﻠﻤﺮﺿﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﻔﻴﺎﺕ ( ﻫﻮ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺮﺍﺭﻛﻴﺔ ﻭﺗﻄﺒﻴﻊ ﺍﻷﺣﻜﺎﻡ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺺ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺭﺋﻴﺴﻲ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ‪/‬ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﺍﻧﻪ ﻳﺠﻤﻊ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻮﺣﺪ " ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﻭﺗﺄﺳﻴﺲ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ" )‪ (184‬ﻓﻬﻮ ﻳﺴﺘﺨﺮﺝ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺨﻀﻌﻮﻥ ﻟﻠﻔﺤﺺ‬
‫)ﻳﻘﻮﻟﻮﻥ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻌﺮﻓﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﻳﺪﻟﻮﺍ ﺑﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎﺕ ﻋﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺔ ( ﻭﻳﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺼﺮﻓﺎﺗﻬﻢ )ﺏﺇﺟﺒﺎﺭﻫﻢ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻬﻬﻢ ﻟﺒﺮﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﻋﻼﺟﻲ(‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻗﺮﺏ ﻣﻤﺎ ﻫﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺍﻟﻬﻨﺪﺳﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﻜﻮﻧﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺄﻟﻮﻑ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﻌﺘﺒﺮ ﺃﻥ " ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ ‪ " knowledge is power‬ﺑﻤﺎ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺣﻴﻦ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺛﻨﺎﻥ ﻳﻮﺟﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺎً ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺍﻷﻗﻞ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺮﻱ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻫﺪﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﻭﺃﻫﺪﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﻓﺼﻠﻬﺎ ‪ :‬ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻧﺤﻦ ﻧﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﻧﺤﻦ ﻧﻌﺮﻑ ‪in knowing we‬‬
‫‪.control and in control we know‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺺ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﻳﻀﻊ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻓﻲ "ﻣﺠﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺛﻴﻖ" ﻓﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺺ ﺗﺴﺠﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻭﺛﺎﺋﻖ ﺗﻤﺪﻧﺎ ﺑﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎﺕ ﻣﻔﺼﻠﺔ ﻋﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺤﻮﺻﻴﻦ ﻭﺗﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﻧﻈﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﻴﻬﻢ ) ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻛﺸﻮﻑ ﺍﻟﻐﻴﺎﺏ ﻟﻠﺘﻼﻣﻴﺬ‪ ،‬ﺳﺠﻼﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺿﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﻔﻴﺎﺕ ( ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﺳﺎﺱ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻼﺕ ﻳﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻫﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﻓﺌﺎﺕ ﻭﻣﺘﻮﺳﻄﺎﺕ ﻣﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺑﺪﻭﺭﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺃﺳﺎﺱ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺮ ﻓﺔ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻔﺤﺺ ﻳﺤﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺺ ﺍﻟﻲ "ﺣﺎﻟﺔ"– ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻨﻴﻦ ﻟﻠﻚﻟﻤﺔ ‪ :‬ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻋﻠﻤﻲ ﻭﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻟﻠﺮﻋﺎﻳﺔ‬
‫;ﺍﻟﺮﻋﺎﻳﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﺎً ﻓﺮﺻﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﻴﻄﺮﺓ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﺑﻨﺘﺎﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﻫﻮ ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﻌﻤﺎﺭﻱ ﻣﺜﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮ ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﻟﺴﺠﻦ ﺑﻨﻲ ﺑﺤﻴﺚ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻛﻞ‬
‫ﺳﺠﻴﻦ ﻣﻌﺰﻭﻝ ﻋﻦ ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻨﺎء ﻭﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺮﺋﻲ ﻟﻬﻢ ) ﻓﻲ "ﺯﻧﺰﺍﻧﺔ" ﻣﻨﻔﺼﻠﺔ ( ﻭﻛﻞ ﻧﺰﻳﻞ ﻫﻮ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﺎً ﻣﺮﺋﻲ ﻝﺷﺎﺷﺔ ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺑﺮﺝ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻱ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﺇﻑﻥ ﺃﺟﻬﺰﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ ﻟﻦ ﺗﺘﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺭﺻﺪ ﻛﻞ ﺳﺠﻴﻦ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺣﺪﺍ ﻃﻮﺍﻝ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﺖ ;‬
‫ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﻄﺔ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﻗﺪ ﺗﻔﻌﻞ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻱ ﻭﻗﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺬ ﺃﻥ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻨﺎء ﻻ ﻳﻌﺮﻓﻮﻥ ﺃﺑﺪﺍً ﻣﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻛﺎﻧﻮﺍ ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﻴﻦ ﻓﻴﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻳﺘﺼﺮﻓﻮﺍ ﻭﻛﺄﻧﻬﻢ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﺎً ‪ .‬ﻛﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﺎﻟﺴﻴﻄﺮﺓ ﺗﻢ ﺇﺣﺮﺍﺯﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺐ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺧﻠﻲ ﻟﻬﺆﻻء‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻨﺎء ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﻛﺒﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺆﻻء ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﻴﻦ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻴﻮﺩ ﺣﺪﻳﺪﻳﺔ ﺛﻘﻴﻠﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ 4‬ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﻛﻠﻤﺔ ‪ Discipline‬ﻓﻲ ﺧﻄﺎﺏ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻀﺒﻂ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﻭﺗﻌﻤﻞ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺔ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪ ﻭﻓﻘﺎً ﻟﻨﻈﺎﻡ ﺇﻧﺎﺑﺔ ﻭﺇﺣﻼﻝ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺣﻴﺎﻧﺎً ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﺿﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﻲ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﻠﺤﻈﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﻣﺒﺪﺃ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻧﻮﺑﻴﺘﻴﻜﻮﻥ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻪ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﺠﻮﻥ ﻭ ﻟﻜﻦ ﺃﻳﻀﺎًُ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻱ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻣﻦ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ )ﻣﺼﻨﻊ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺘﺸﻔﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺪﺭﺳﺔ( ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺑﻨﺘﺎﻡ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﺑﺪﺍً ﻣﻦ ﺑﻨﺎﺋﻪ ﻓﺈﻥ ﻣﺒﺪﺃﻩ ﻗﺪ ﻏﺰﺍ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻨﺎﺣﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ‪ ،‬ﺇﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﻷﺩﺍﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﺒﺪﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﺑﺴﻠﻄﺎﺕ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ )ﺍﻟﻤﻠﻮﻙ ﻭﺍﻝﻗﻀﺎﺓ( ﻛﻌﻼﻗﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﻮﺓ ﺍﻷﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 3.4‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻠﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﺨﻄﻄﺎً ﻟﻪ ﺑﻮﺿﻮﺡ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺇﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﺍً ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮﺍً ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻲ ﻟﺮﺍﻗﺐ ﻭﻋﺎﻗﺐ ﺍﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻷ ﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻨﻮﻋﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺲ )"ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﺓ ﻋﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻥﻳﺔ"‪ ،‬ﺗﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻲ( ﻟﺪﻳﻬﺎ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻭﺛﻴﻖ ﺑﺒﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﺑﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻬﻲ ﻣﺮﺷﺢ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻲ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺠﺰء ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﻧﺸﺮ ﻓﻲ ‪ 1976‬ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﺨﻄﻄﺎً ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻛﻤﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﻟﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﻟﺠﻮﺍﻧﺐ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ) ﺍﻷﻃﻔﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻦﺳﺎء‪" ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺤﺮﻓﻴﻦ"‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺴﻜﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺇﻟﺦ ‪ ( .‬ﻓﻘﺪ ﺣﺪﺩ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﻮ ﻁ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺮﻳﻀﺔ ﻟﻤﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻛﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻳﺸﺮﺡ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮ ﺍﻷﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺳﻴﺘﻢ ﺇﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻣﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﺍﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺮﻭﺿﺔ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺲ ﺗﻮﺍﺯﻱ ﺍﻟﺮﻗﺎﺑﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺟﻌﻞ‬
‫ﺑﺘﻮﻓﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻴﻄﺮﺓ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﻋﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺲ )ﻛﺎﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ( ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻟﻠﺘﺨﺼﺼﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺰﻋﻮﻣﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻘﻮﻡ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺗﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻭﻗﺖ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ‪ .‬ﻝﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻳﺼﺒﺢ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺑﻌﺪﺍً ﺁﺧﺮ ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺗﺒﻄﺔ ﺑﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺲ ﻓﺎﻷﻣﺮ‬
‫ﻻ ﻳﻘﺖﺻﺮ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺗﺤﻜﻢ ﻳﻤﺎﺭﺱ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻵﺧﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﺗﺤﻜﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ‬
‫ﻷﻧﻔﺴﻬﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻳﺴﺘﺪﻣﺠﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻦﺻﻮﺹ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺲ ﻛﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﻳﻘﻮﻣﻮﻥ ﺑﻤﺮﺍﻗﺒﺔ ﺃﻧﻔﺴﻬﻢ ﻛﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻬﻢ ﻟﻠﺘﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﻣﻊ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﻪ ﻡ ﻟﻴﺴﻮﺍ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻡ ﺭﺍﻗﺒﻴﻦ ﺑﻮﺻﻔﻬﻢ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﺮﻗﺎﺑﺔ‪/‬ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺩﻳﺐ ﺑﻞ ﺃﻳﻀًﺎ ﺑﻮﺻﻔﻬﻢ‬
‫ﺫﻭﺍﺕ ﺧﺎﺿﻌﺔ ﻟﺘﺪﻗﻴﻖ ﻭﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺫﺍﺗﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻜﻞ ﻣﺎ ﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻨﻘﺪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻴﺎً ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻱ ﺑﻘﺪﺭ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻹﺣﺮﺍﺯ ﻫﺪﻑ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﺪﻱ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻹﺩﻋﺎءﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺻﺮﺓ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ – ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻭﺳﺎﺋﻞ )ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ( ﺟﺪﻳﺪﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﻣﻊ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﺟﻮﺍﻧﺐ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﺗﺸﺘﺒﻚ‬
‫‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮ ﻣﻊ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻴﺔ ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺟﻴﺔ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﺎً ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺗﺒﻄﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻀﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺑﺴﺘﻤﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﻛﺰﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻤﺜﻞ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﻘﺪﻡ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﻟﺴﺆﺍﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﻭﺹﻭﻻً ﺍﻟﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ‪ .‬ﺣﺘﻲ ﺍﻵﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ‬
‫ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﺠﺰء ﺍﻷﻛﺜﺮ ﻗﻮﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻪ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻱ ﻭﻫﻮ ﻳﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺇﻧﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﺷﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻨﺎ‪.‬‬

‫–‬

‫‪ 4‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻣﺠﺮﺩ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﻋﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺸﻜﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ‪ .‬ﻛﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺴﺮﻳﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﻳﻨﺴﺐ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻝﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﻣﻨﺬ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﺓ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ‪ .‬ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺕﻣﻴﺰﺍً )ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻣﺘﺴﻖ ﻣﻊ ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﻫﻴﺪﺟﺮ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ( ﻳﺮﻱ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 4.3‬ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ‬
‫ﻳﺠﺎﺩﻝ ﻑﻭﻛﻮ ﺑﺄﻧﻪ ﻣﻨﺬ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﻭﺣﺘﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ )ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻳﻄﻠﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻴﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ ( ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ‬
‫ﺑﺒﺴﺎﻃﺔ ﻳﻌﺮﻑ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻜﺮ ‪ :‬ﺃﻥ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻫﻮ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻮﻇﻒ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻳﺠﺐ ﺍﻥ ﻧﻜﻮﻥ‬
‫ﻫﺬﺍ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﺃﻱ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺖ ﻣﺎﺛﻞ‪ :‬ﻻ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺿﺤﻴﻦ ﺑﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻌﻨﻴﻪ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﺷﻴﺌﺎً ‪ .‬ﻑ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﺃﻱ ﺳﻤﺎﺕ )ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ( ﻟﻸﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﺗﺆﺳﺲ ﻟﺘﻤﺜﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺊ ‪ ) .‬ﻫﺬﺍ ﻻ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﻳﺞ ﺏ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺑﻼ‬

‫ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ ﺃﻭ ﺣﺘﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﺎﺋﺺ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﺜﻠﻪ ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺊ( ﻭﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺲ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻋﺼﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺧﻼﻟﻪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﻔﻬﻢ ﻛﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺕﻣﺎﺛﻞ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺎﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺨﺮﻳﻄﺔ ﻫﻲ ﻧﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻣﻔﻴﺪ ﻟﻠﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ‪ ،‬ﻫﻲ ﺗﺘﻜﻮﻥ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺐﻳﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﻮﻁ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺎﻧﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﻃﻮﺍﻝ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﻟﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﻃﺮﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺪﻳﻨﺔ ﻭ ﻣﺎ ﺣﻮﻟﻬﺎ ‪ .‬ﻫﺬﺍ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻕ ﻟﺪﻳﻬﺎ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺨﺮﻳﻄﺔ )ﺍﻟﺘﺨﺎﻧﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﻃﻮﺍﻝ‪ ،‬ﻭﺃﻟﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺨﻄﻮﻁ ( ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻢ ﻋﻄﺎﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺨﺮﻳﻄﺔ )ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺨﻄﻮﻁ( ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺮﺩﺓ ﻟﻠﻄﺮﻕ ‪ .‬ﻓﻲ ﻗﻞﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ ﻳﻜﻤﻦ ﻣﺒﺪﺃ ﺃﻧﻨﺎ ﻧﻌﺮﻑ ﺑﻔﻀﻞ ﺇﻣﺘﻼﻛﻨﺎ ﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﻫﻲ‬
‫ﺑﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻌﺮﻓﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻄﺒﻊ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺲ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﺮﻳﻄﺔ ﻧﺤﻦ ﻻ ﻧﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﻷﻥ ﻧﻌﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﺎﺋﺺ ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻠﻴﺔ ﻷﻑ ﻛﺎﺭﻧﺎ‬
‫ﺑﻔﻀﻞ ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻴﻞ )ﺑﻤﺼﻄﻠﺤﺎﺕ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺪﺭﺳﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻧﺤﻦ ﻻ ﻧﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﻷﻥ ﻧﻌﺮﻑ "ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﻳﺔ ‪ ("5‬ﻧﺤﻦ‬
‫ﻓﻘﻂ ﻧﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻌﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺮﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺘﺸﺎﺭﻛﻬﺎ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء ﺍ ﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻤﺜﻠﻬﺎ )ﺑﻨﻴﺔ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ " ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﻴﺔ"(‪ .‬ﻟﺪﻳﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻝﺭﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺇﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺮﺩﺓ ﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭﻧﺎ‪ ،‬ﻧﺤﻦ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻨﺎ ﺃﻥ "ﻧﺮﻱ" ﺍﻟﺒﻨﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻟﺪﻳﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺇﺿﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻳﻤﻚﻧﻨﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻌﺪﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﻟﻨﺠﻌﻞ ﺗﻤﺜﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﻣﺎ ﺃﻓﻀﻞ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻀﺒﻂ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻨﺎ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻧﻌﺪﻝ ﺧﺮﻳﻄﺔ ﻟﻨﻄﻮﺭﻫﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻴﻒ ‪ ،‬ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻨﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻌﺮﻑ ﺃﻥ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻲ ﺗﻤﺜﻴﻞ ﻟﺸﻴﺊ ﻣﺎ – ﻭﺍﻧﻪ ﺗﻤﺜﻴﻞ ﻛﺎﻑ؟ ﻟﻴﺲ‪ ،‬ﻳﺠﺎﺩﻝ‬
‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻤﻘﺎﺭﻧﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﻴﺊ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻟﻮ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺑﻌﻴﺪﺍً ﻋﻦ ﺗﻤﺜﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﺴﺖ ﺣﻴﻞ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻳﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﻴﺊ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ‬
‫)ﺑﻴﻨﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ‪ ،‬ﺃﻥ ﺗﻌﺮﻑ ﻫﻮ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ‪ .(To know is to represent‬ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺣﻴﺪﺓ ﺍﺫﻥ ﻫﻲ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﻳﺠﺐ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺒﻴﻦ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻤﺜﻴﻞ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻤﺜﻴﻞ ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﺆﺍﻝ ﻋﻦ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺫﺍ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﺬﻩ "ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺟﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺗﻴﺔ" ﻫﻲ ﻛﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻨﺎﻟﻚ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻜﻔﺎﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻳﺠﺐ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻔﺮﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺪﻟﻞ ﻋﻞ ﻱ ﻛﻔﺎﻳﺘﻬﻢ – ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ " ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺿﺢﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﻴﺰﺓ ‪ "6‬ﻋﻨﺪ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻻﻧﻄﺒﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﺴﻴﻄﺔ ‪ 7‬ﻋﻨﺪ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺑﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﻓﺒﺪﺍﻳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺘﻤﺪ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺩﺍﺋﻢ ﻋﻠﻲ "ﺍﻟﺤﺪﺱ" ) ﻋﻘﻠﻲ ﺃﻭ ﺣﺴﻲ (‪ .‬ﻻﺣﻆ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻓﺈﻥ "ﺣﺪﺱ" ﻙﺍﻑﻳﺔ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﻻ ﻳﺆﺳﺲ‬
‫ﺑﻨﻔﺴﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﺴﺘﻖﻝ ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺊ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﺜﻞ ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ‪ .‬ﺑﻘﺪﺭ ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺑﺪﺍﻳﺎﺗﻬﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ‬
‫ﻫﺬﺍ ﺳﻴﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﻷ ﻥ ﻳﺆﺳﺲ ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻲ ﺃﺧﺮﻱ ‪ ) .‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﺣﺠﺔ ﺍﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺁﺧﺮ‬
‫ﺃﺷﻴﺎء ﻛﻬﺬﻩ ﺃﻭ ﻟﻮ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ‪ ،‬ﻑ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﺱ(‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺤﻦ ﻧﺮﻱ ﺍﺫﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻔﺘﺎﺡ ﻟﻔﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮ ﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻴﺔ ﻫﻮ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﻋﻘﻠﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻜﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫)ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﻳﺔ ( ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺟﻤﻴﻌﻬﻢ ﻳﺘﻔﻘﻮﺍ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻧﻪ ﻛﺘﻤﺜﻼﺕ‬
‫ﻗﺪ ﻳﺨﺘﻠﻔﻮﺍ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻷﻧﻄﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻓﻜﺎﺭ‬
‫)ﺍﺑﺴﺘﻤﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎً ﺇﻥ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﺍﻧﻄﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎً ( ﻫﻲ "ﻻ‪ -‬ﻣﺎﺩﻳﺔ" ﻭ "ﻻ‪ -‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ" ﺫﻟﻚ ﺍﻧﻬﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻀﺒﻂ ﻛﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺗﻬﻢ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ‬
‫ﻱ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻣﻦ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺗﺒﻊ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻫﻢ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻥ ﻟﻬﻢ ﺩﻭﺭﺍً ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺸﺒﻜﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺭﺿﺔ ﻝﻟﻌﻮﺍﻟﻢ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻊ ﺓ‬
‫ﺃﺻﺒﺤﺖ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ – ﻫﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻀﺒﻂ ﻛﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺃﻭ ‪/‬ﻭﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺎ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻘﻮﻡ ﺑﺄﻱ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺎً ﻟﻬﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺃﻋﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﻔﻚ ﺭ‪ :‬ﺗﻤﺜﻴﻞ ﻣﺎﺩﻱ ﻟﻸﻓﻜﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻻﻣﻌﻨﻲ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺇﻻ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻗﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﻬﻢ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 5‬ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﻳﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻊ "ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ" ﻓﻤﺎ ﻟﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺻﻮﺭﻳﺔ ﻳﺠﺐ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻟﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻓﻌﻞﻱ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﻴﺔ ﻓﻼ ﺗﺸﺘﺮﻁ ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﻔﻌﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﺸﻴﺊ ﻓﻬﻲ ﺗﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻫﻴﺔ ﻓﺈﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﺧﻴﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻛﺎﻟﺠﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺜﻼ ﻟﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻟﻪ‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺻﻮﺭﻳﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ 6‬ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺿﺤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺘﻤﻴﺰﺓ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﺿﺤﺔ ﺑﺬﺍﺗﻬﺎ ﻻ ﺗﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﻟﺒﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﻭﻏﻴﺮ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺸﻚ ﻭﻻ ﻧﺘﻮﺻﻞ ﺇﻝﻳﻬﺎ ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻼﺣﻈﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﺗﻘﻮﻡ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ‪.‬‬
‫‪ 7‬ﺍﻻﻧﻄﺒﺎﻉ ﺍﻟﺒﺴﻴﻂ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻹﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﻈﻬﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﻦ ﻷﻭﻝ ﻭﻫﻠﺔ ﻛﺴﻤﺎﻉ ﺻﻮﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮ ﺍﻟﻲ ﻟﻮﻥ ﻭﻫﻮ ﻳﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻻﻧﻄﺒﺎﻉ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺮﻛﺐ ﻓﻬﻮ ﺍﻧﻄﺒﺎﻉ ﻳﺘﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﻓﺈﻧﻄﺒﺎﻋﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺬﻫﺐ ﻣﺜﻼ ﻫﻮ ﺇﻧﻄﺒﺎﻉ ﻣﺮﻛﺐ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻠﻮﻥ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻠﻤﺲ‪.‬‬

‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ﻟﻠﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ‬
‫ﻳﻘﻮﻝ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺃﻥ "ﺍﻟﺖﺣﻮﻝ" ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﻱﺣﺪﺙ ﻣﻊ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ )ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺃ ﻧﻪ ﻻﺷﻚ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﺠﺮﺩ‬
‫ﻡ ﺛﺎﻝ ﻟﺸﻴﺊ ﻫﻮ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺍﺗﺴﺎﻋﺎً ﻭﻋﻤﻘﺎً ( ﺣﻴﻦ ﺃﺻﺒﺢ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﺆﺍﻝ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻫﻞ ﻫﻲ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺗﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻓﻌﻼً ﻭﺇﻥ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻛﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﻜﻴﻒ )ﺑﻔﻀﻞ ﻣﺎﺫﺍ ( ﺗﻔﻌﻞ ﺫﻟﻚ ‪ .‬ﺑﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﺁﺧﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻌﺪ ﻳﻨﻈﺮ ﺇﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﻐﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺇﺷﻜﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ‪ .‬ﺍﻵﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻔﻜﺮ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ )ﺃﻭ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺟﺬﻭﺭ ﻓﻲ ( ﺷﻴﺊ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ‪ .‬ﻫﺬﺍ‬
‫ﻻ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻌﺪ ﻟﺪﻳﻪ ﺃﻱ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﻃﻼﻕ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ‪ .‬ﺭﺑﻤﺎ ﺑﻌﺾ )ﺃﻭ ﺣﺘﻲ ﻛﻞ( ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻣﺎﺯﺍﻟﺖ ﻣﺘﻮﺭﻃﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻛﻮﻥ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﺃﺷﻴﺎء‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻳﺼﺮ‪ ،‬ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺍﻵﻥ ﻓﻘﻂ ) ﻣﻊ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ( ﺃﺻﺒﺢ ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺎً ﻫﻮ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﺫﺍﺗﻪ )ﻭﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻝﺗﻲ ﻣﺜﻠﺖ( ﻗﺪ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺃﺻﻮﻝ ﻓﻲ ﺷﻴﺊ ﺁﺧﺮ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺤﺴﺐ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﺃﺩﻱ ﻹﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺣﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺇﻣﺘﻴﺎﺯﺍً ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻃﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﻛﺎﻥﻁ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺬﻱ‬
‫ﻓﻜﺮ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻼﺕ )ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪﺍﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺃﻓﻜﺎﺭ ( ﻫﻲ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﺘﺠﺎﺕ )"ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ" ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ( ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻞ‪ .‬ﻟﻴﺲ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ‪،‬‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻲ ﺃﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﻭﻟﻚ ﻥ ﻛﺈﻧﺘﻤﺎء ﺇﻟﻲ ﺣﻘﻞ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﻣﻤﻴﺰ ‪ :‬ﺫﺍﺗﻴﺔ ﺗﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ ‪ .‬ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﺣﺎﻓﻆ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﻟﺤﺎﺡ‬
‫ﺓ‬
‫ﻛﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﻓﻬﻤﻬﺎ ﻛﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﺣﺪﺩ ﺃﺳﺲ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﺎﻝ )ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻲ(‬
‫ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺃ ﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻳﻀﻤﻬﺎ ‪) .‬ﻳﺠﺐ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻀﻴﻒ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻄﺒﻊ ‪ ،‬ﺃﻥ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻣﻴﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻘﻴﺎً‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﺪﻳﻞ‬
‫ﻱ ﻫﻮ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻘﻲ ﺇﻛﺘﺸﻒ ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻘﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺒﻌﺖ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ( ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺁﺧﺮ‪ -‬ﻭﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﺎ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺣﺪﺍﺙﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﺣﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ‪ .‬ﻫﺬﺍ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻄﻮﺭ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻌﻘﻮﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺭﺑﻂ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ‬
‫ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ‪ ) .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻫﺮﺩﺭ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ( ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻌﺘﺒﺮ ﺍﻵﻥ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻲ )ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺆﺭﺧﻦ( ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻗﺎﺑﻼً ﻟﻠﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻓﻲ ﺻﻴﻐﺘﻪ ﺍﻷﺻﻠﻴﺔ ‪ .‬ﻷﻧﻪ ﻟﻜﻲ ﻧﺠﻌﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻛﻠﻬﺎ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﺳﻦﺣﺮﻣﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺻﻔﺔ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻳﺔ ﻭﺳﻮﻑ ﻳﺪﻣﺮ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺻﻔﺘﻬﺎ ﻛﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ‪ .‬ﺑﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﺁﺧﺮ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻲ ﺣﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻳﻘﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﺑﺠﻌﻞ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻛﻠﻬﺎ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﻳﺞﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻳﺤﺘﻔﻆ ﺑﻤﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﻲ ﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻴﻀﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﻔﺎﻅ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺷﺮﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 4.4‬ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻭ"ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ"‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻘﻄﺔ ﻳﻘﺪﻡ ﻟﻨﺎ "ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء " ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻴﺼﺘﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﻛﺰﻳﺘﻴﻦ ﻟﻠﻒﻛﺮ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ‪ :‬ﻋﻮﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻭ "ﻣﻴﻼﺩ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ "‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﻗﺸﺘﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺗﻔﺴﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻟﻤﺎﺫﺍ ﻳﺘﺤﺪﺙ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻋﻦ ﻋﻮﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ‪ :‬ﻓﻬﻲ ﺍﻵﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﻭ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﻟﻢ ﺗﻜﻦ ﻟﺘﻠﻌﺒﻪ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﻛﻮﻧﻬﺎ ﺃﺩﺍﺓ ﻟﻸﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺩﺓ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺓ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺔ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻄﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺑﻄﺮﻕ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻳﻘﺎﺏﻝ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻣﺘﻤﻴﺰ ﻣﻦ "ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺩﺓ"‪ .‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﻌﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻓﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﻴﺔ ﻗﺪﻡ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻛﺎﺕ ﻭﺗﺸﻮﻫﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻨﺎ ﺍﻥ ﻧﺴﺘﺒﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺃﺳﺎﻟﻴﺐ ﺍﻟﺼﻮﺭﻧﺔ ‪ .‬ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ ﺃﺧﺮﻱ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﺲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺭﺑﻤﺎ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺣﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻐﺘﻨﺎ ﻭﺍﻵﻥ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻨﺎ ﺍﻛﺘﺸﺎﻓﻬﺎ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻭﻳﻞ ﺍﻝ ﻫﻲﺭﻣﻨﻮﻃﻴﻘﻲ‪ ) .‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﻬﺎﺫﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻈﻮﺭﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻘﺎﺑﻠﻲﻥ‪ -‬ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻣﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﺤﺖ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺮﻗﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻠﻴﺔ ‪ 8‬ﻭﺍﻷﻭﺭﻭﺑﻴﺔ ‪ – 9‬ﻫﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺑﺤﺴﺐ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﺗﻜﻤﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ(‬
‫ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﺇﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺃﺧﺮﻱ ‪ :‬ﺑﻌﺪ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺤﺮﺭﺕ ﻣﻦ ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﻸﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻥ ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ )ﻛﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻮﺿﻊ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺼﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ( ﻛﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻠﺔ ﺫﺍﺗﻴﺎً – ﺑﻞ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﺑﺈﺳﺘﻘﻼﻝ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻋﻤﻘﺎً ﻣﻦ ﻟﻐﺔ ﻋﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ ‪ .‬ﺑﻤﺎ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻳﻮﺟﺪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺗﻤﺎﺛﻞ‬
‫ﻳﺮﺑﻄﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻫﻲ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺫﺍﺗﻪ ﺍ‪ ،‬ﻻ ﺗﺘﺤﺪﺙ ﻋﻦ ﺷﻴﺊ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﻫﺬﺍ ﻫﻮ ﺣﻘﻞ‬
‫"ﺍﻷﺩﺏ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻟﺺ " ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﻀﺮﻩ ﻣﺎﻻﺭﻣﻴﻴﻪ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺃﺟﺎﺏ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﻧﻴﺘﺸﻪ )ﺍﻟﺠﻴﻨﺎﻟﻮﺟﻲ( "ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺘﻜﻠﻢ؟ " ﻓﺄﺟﺎﺏ "ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ‬

‫‪ 8‬ﻳﻘﺼﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻠﻴﺔ ‪ Analytical Philosophy‬ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺳﺎﺩﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺑﺎﻹﻧﺠﻠﻴﺰﻳﺔ ﻭﻣﻦ ﺃﻫﻢ ﺭﻣﻮﺯﻫﺎ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﺍﻧﺪ ﺭﺍﺳﻞ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﻮﺿﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻄﻘﻴﺔ ﻭﻓﻼﺳﻔﺔ ﻣﺪﺭﺳﺔ ﺃﻭﻛﺴﻔﻮﺭﺩ ﻭﻫﻲ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺗﻬﺘﻢ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻨﻄﻖ ﻭﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻭﺗﺴﺘﺒﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻘﺎ‪.‬‬
‫‪ 9‬ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﺭﻭﺑﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺭﻳﺔ ‪ Continental Philosophy‬ﻭﻳﻘﺼﺪ ﺑﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﺭﺑﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺳﻊ ﻋﺸﺮ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﻭﻗﺪ ﻭﺿﻊ ﻫﺬﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻄﻠﺢ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﻟﻔﻼﺳﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻠﻴﻴﻦ ﻟﻴﻤﻴﺰﻭﺍ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺎﺗﻬﻢ ﻭﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻭﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻥ ﻧﻀﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺒﻨﻴﻮﻳﺔ‪...‬ﺇﻟﺦ ﺗﺤﺖ‬
‫ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﻄﻠﺢ‪.‬‬

‫ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ"‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺲ ﻣﻦ ﻋﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻀﺔ ﻻ ﻭﺝﻭﺩ ﻟﻜﻠﻤﺔ ﺇﻟﻬﻴﺔ ﻛﺎﻣﻨﺔ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺍﻟﺴﻄﺢ ﺗﻌﻄﻲ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻓﺮﻳﺪﺓ ﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﺩﺏ ﺣﺮﻓﻴﺎً ﻫﻮ ﻻﺷﻴﺊ ﺑﺨﻼﻑ ﻛﻮﻧﻪ ﻟﻐﺔ – ﺃﻭ ﻋﺪﺓ ﻟﻐﺎﺕ ﺗﺘﺤﺪﺙ ﻋﻦ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ ﻭﻟﻨﻔﺴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﻫﻮ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﻫﻮ "ﺷﻜﻞ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ " ﺍﻟﻨﻘﻄﺔ ﺍﻷﻛﺜﺮ ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻦ "ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ" ﺍﻧﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺇﺑﺴﺘﻤﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ ‪ .‬ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻳﻘﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻟﻢ ﻳﻮﺟﺪ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ )ﺃﻭ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺫﻟﻚ ( ﻟﻴﺲ ﻷﻧﻪ ﻟﻢ ﺗﻜﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﻉ ﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺮﻱ ﻛﻨﻮﻉ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺮﻳﺔ ﻛﺴﻴﻜﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺃ ﻭ ﻛﺄ ﺧﻼﻕ‪ ،‬ﺃﻭ ﻛﻤﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻷﺣﺮﻱ "ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻭﻋﻲ ﺇﺑﺴﺘﻤﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻛﻬﺬﺍ " ) ﺍﻟﻜﻠﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء ‪ (309 ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺣﺘﻲ "ﺍﻹﺑﺴﺘﻤﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ" ﻱﺣﺘﺎﺝ ﻹﺳﺘﻦﺗﺎﺝ‪ .‬ﻻﻳﻮﺟﺪ ﺷﻚ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺣﺘﻲ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺕ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺒﺶﺭﻱ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺍﻝﺣﺎﻣﻞ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ) ﺃﻱ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻦ ﻳﻤﺘﻠﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ ﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ (‪ .‬ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ ﺃﺧﺮﻱ ﻫﻮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺇﺑﺴﺘﻤﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻧﻄﻲ ﻟﻠﺬﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻋﻨﺪ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻀﺎ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺗﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺒﺸﺮ ﻫﻢ ﺣﻮﺍﻣﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻼﺕ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ‬
‫ﻣﺼﺪﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻣﺴﺎﺣﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻋﻦ "ﺍﻟﺘﺄﺳﻴﺲ ‪."Constitution‬‬
‫ﻳﻮﺿﺢ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﻜﺮﺗﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻣﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻛﺎﺷﻔﺔ ﻟﻠﻜﻮﺟﻴﺘﻮ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻜﺎﺭﺗﻲ‪ ،‬ﻣﻈﻬﺮًﺍ ﻟﻤﺎﺫﺍ ﻫﻮ ﻳﻘﻴﻨﻲ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻟﻠﺸﻚ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﺣﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻴﺔ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻴﺲ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﺍﻹﺑﺴﺘﻤﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ‪ .‬ﻫﻨﺎﻙ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺘﺎﻥ ﻟﻤﺴﺎءﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﺟﻴﺘﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻲ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻗﺘﺮﺍﺡ ﺃﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺕ )ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻜﺮﺓ‪ ،‬ﺍﻷﻧﺎ ( ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺞ ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﺮﺩ ﻓﻌﻞ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻷﺷﻴﺎء‪ ،‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﻨﺤﻦ ﻻ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ ﺍﻹﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ ﻣﻦ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﺍﻟﻲ ﻣﻔﻜﺮ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﺼﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻻ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺃﻱ ﺷﻴﺊ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﻫﻮ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﺛﺎﻧﻲ ﺳﻴﻜﻮﻥ ﺃ ﻥ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺕ ﻛﻤﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺃﻻ ﺗﻜﻮﻥ "ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ " ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻓﺤﺴﺐ ﻫﻲ "ﻣﻨﺘﺞ ـﻝ" ) ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﺑﻮﺍﺳﻂ ﺓ (‬
‫ﻋﻘﻞ ﻫﻮ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻝﺗﻜﻤﻴﻠﻲ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻹﻋﺘﺮﺍﺽ ﻟﻪ ﺛﻘﻠﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺍﺫﺍ ﻓﻜﺮﻧﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻞ "ﺍﻷﻛﺜﺮ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻴﺔ " ﻛﺤﺎﺋﺰ‬
‫ﻻ ﺗﻮﺟﺪ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﻧﻌﺘﻤﺪ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﻮﻝ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺕ ﻛﻤﻤﺜﻞ ﻫﻲ "ﺃﻗﻞ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺬﺍﺕ ﻛﻤﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻌﻴﺪﺍً ﻋﻦ ﺗﻤﺜﻴﻠﻬﺎ )ﻭﺇﻻ‪ ،‬ﻑ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺔ"( ﻭﻟﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﺓ ﺃﺧﺮﻱ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻫﻮ ﺑﺎﻟﻀﺒﻂ ﻣﺎ ﻻﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﻜﻴﺮ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺿﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻜﻼﺳﻴﻜﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 4.5‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻳﻜﻤﻦ ﺗﻨﺎﻫﻴﻪ ‪ :‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﺔ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﺗﺼﻔﻪ ﺑﺄﻧﻪ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺑﻘﻮﻱ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﺓ )ﻋﻀﻮﻳﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺇﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﻐﻮﻳﺔ ( ﺗﻌﻤﻞ ﻛﻠﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ‪ .‬ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻷﻥ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ ﺍﻟﻢ ﺡﺩﻭﺩ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺎً‬
‫‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻀﻤﻨﺎً ﺃﻧﻔﺴﻨﺎ ﻛﻤﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻳﺠﺐ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺪﺭ ﻟﻜﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺜﻼﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺑﻤﻘﺘﻀﺎﻫﺎ ﻧﻌﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ‬
‫ﺗﺠﺮﻳﺒﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﺃﻧﺎ )ﻭﻋﻴﻲ( ﻳﺠﺐ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﻀﻊﻩ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺗﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﻤﺜﻞ ﻭﻣﺼﺪﺭ ﺗﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﻤﺜﻼﺕ ‪ .‬ﻛﻴﻒ‬
‫ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺎً ؟ ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻫﻲ ﺃﻧﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻝﻧﻬﺎﻳﺔ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻣﻤﻜﻨﺎً – ﻭﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ )ﺍﻟﻤﺪﺭﻛﺔ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺎً( ﺗﻌﻨﻲ ﺍﻧﻬﻴﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻻﺑﺴﺘﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﻳﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ "ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ " ﻳﻮﺿﺢ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﺣﺼﺎً ﺍﻟﺠﻬﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻤﺔ‬
‫)ﻣﺠﺘﻤﻌﺔ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ( ﻟﻺﺟﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﺆﺍﻝ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺆﺍﻝ – ﻭﺍﻻﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻹﺟﺎﺑﺘﻪ – ﺗﻌﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻟﻄﺒﻊ ﺍﻟﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﻂ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﺍﻷﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ‪ :‬ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺍﻣﻞ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺤﺘﻢ ﺗﻨﺎﻫﻴﻨﺎ )ﺧﻀﻮﻋﻨﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﻜﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺰﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻴﻪ‪.... ،‬ﺇﻟﺦ( ﻫﻲ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﺷﺮﻭﻁ ﺃ ﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻹﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻨﺎﻫﻴﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺇ ﺫﻥ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺆﺱَﺱ ﻭﻣﺆﺱِﺱ ﻓﻲ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﺖ )ﺇﻳﺠﺎﺑﻲ ﻭﺃﺳﺎ ﺳﻲ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﻳﻀﻌﻬﺎ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ (‪ .‬ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ‬
‫)ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻧﻄﻴﺔ ﻭﻣﺎﺑﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻧﻄﻴﺔ( – ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ ‪ -‬ﻫﻮ ﺇﻇﻬﺎﺭﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺇﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻫﺬﺍ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ﺗﺤﺎﻭﻝ ﺃﻥ ﺗﺤﻞ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺭﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻮﺿﻌﻴﺔ ﺗﺤﺎﻭﻝ ﺍﻥ ﺗﻔﺴﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺑﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﻲ ) ﺍﻟﻔﻴﺰﻳﺎء ﻭﺍﻷﺣﻴﺎء ( ﺑﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﺔ ﺗﻨﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ‪ ) .‬ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺭﻕ ﻫﻮ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻲ ﺗﺆﺳﺲ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺿﻲ – ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺘﻄﻮﺭﻱ –‬
‫( ﻛﻼ ﺍﻟﻤﻦﻇﻮﺭﻳﻦ ﻳﺘﺠﺎﻫﻼﻥ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺣﻴﻦ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺗﺆﺳﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻞ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺳﻮﻑ ﻳﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯ ﻗﻴﻮﺩ ﺍﻷﻳﺪﻳﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ‪ :‬ﻭﻫﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻹﻥﺳﺎﻥ ﻳﺠﻴﺐ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻌﺘﺒﺮ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻟﻠﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﻲ ﺍﻳﺎً ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ‪.‬‬

‫ﻗﺪ ﻳﺒﺪﻭ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﻨﻮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﺍﻟﻬﻮﺳﺮﻟﻴﺔ ﻗﺪ ﺃﻧﺠﺰﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﻧﻄﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻓﻴﻖ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻛﻤﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻭﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻛﺬﺍﺕ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺗﺄﺻﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻜﺎﺭﺗﻲ ‪ :‬ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺗﺄﺳﻴﺲ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺘﻨﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻝﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻟﻺﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻳﺴﺘﺒﻌﺪ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﺩﻱ ﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﺟﻴﺘﻮ ﻙـ)‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﺷﻔﺎﻓﺔ ( ﻟﻠﻮﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻟﺺ ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻌﺪ ﺗﻤﺜﻼً ﺧﺎﻟﺼﺎً ﻭﻟﺬﺍ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﻓﺼﻠﻪ ﻋﻦ "ﺍﻟﻼﻣﻔﻜﺮ ‪ ) "Unthought‬ﺃﻱ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﻘﺎﺋﻖ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻄﺎﻩ ﻋﻦ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻜﻮﻧﻪ ﻧﺤﻦ ( ﻟﻢ ﻳﻌﺪ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻨﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺃﻧﺘﻘﻞ ﻣﻦ "ﺃﻧﺎ ﺃﻓﻜﺮ" ﺍﻟﻲ "ﺃﻧﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ" ﻷﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺘﻮﻱ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻲ ) ﻣﺎ ﺃﻛﻮﻥ ( ﻫﻮ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﺎً ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﻱ ﺃﻱ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻣﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﻣﺠﺮﺩﺓ )ﺃﻧﺎ ﺃﻛﻮﻥ ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺃﺣﻴﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﺃﻋﻤﻞ‪ ،‬ﺃﺗﻜﻠﻢ – ﻭﻛﻞ ﻫﺬﺍ ﻳﺄ ﺧﺬﻧﻲ ﻭﺭﺍء ﻣﺠﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻒﻛﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺮﺩ( ﺃﻭ ﻟﻨﻀﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻋﻜﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﻨﺎ "ﺃﻧﺎ"‬
‫ﻷﺩﻟﻞ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻱ ﺍﻟﺒﺴﻴﻂ ﻛﻤﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻭﺍﻋﻲ‪ ،‬ﺇﺫﻥ ﺃﻧﺎ "ﻻﺃﻛﻮﻥ" ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻧﺎ )ﻛﺬﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ( ﺃﻛﻮﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻭﺻﻞ ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺪ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺃﺳﺲ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻛﻞ ﺵ ﻳﺊ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻫﺬﻩ ﻟﻴﺲﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ )ﻛﻮﺟﻴﺘﻮ(‬
‫‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻳﻜﺎﺭﺕ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﺟﻴﺘﻮ ﺍﻝ ﺣﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺘﻀﻤﻦ )ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ( ﺍﻟﻼﻣﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻫﻮ ﺟﺰء ﻣﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻴﻨﻮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺎ ﻛﻜﻞ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ‪ ،‬ﻳﺠﺐ ﺃﻥ ﺗﻘﺒﻞ ﺍﻟﻼﻣﻔﻜﺮ " ﻛﺎﻵﺧﺮ" ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺇﺳﺘﺒﻌﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﻨﻮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﻴﻦ )ﺳﺎﺭﺗﺮ ﻭﻣﻴﺮﻟﻮﺑﻮﻧﺘﻲ ( ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻮ ﻧﻮﺍ ﻗﺎﺩﺭﻳﻦ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺣﻞ ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ‪ .‬ﻓﻬﻢ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻝﻋﻜﺲ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﻣﻮﺍ ﺑﺘﺠﻨﺐ ﺇﻓﺘﺮﺍﺽ "ﺃﻧﺎ" ﺗﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺑﺪﻻً ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﺭﻛﺰﻭﺍ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻝ ﻣﻠﻤﻮﺱ ﻟﻺﻧﺴﺎﻥ – ﻓﻲ –‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ‪ ،‬ﻳﺪﻋﻲ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮ ﻣﺠﺮﺩ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻜﺮﺍً ﻟﺮﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﻧﺴﻨﺪﻧﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﺧﻴﺮﺍً‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻭﻝ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻔﻼﺳﻔﺔ ) ﻫﻴﺠﻞ ﻭﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻣﻦ ﻧﺎﺣﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺘﺸﺔ ﻭﻫﻴﺪﺟﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺧﺮﻱ ( ﺃﻥ ﻳﺤﻠﻮﺍ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺰﺩﻭﺝ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻌﻪ ﻛﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺮﻛﺔ ﺗﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﺻﻌﻮﺑﺎﺕ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻳﺠﺐ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﻨﺘﺞ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﻭ ﺃﻳﻀﺎً ﻫﻮ ﺃﺻﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺦ ‪ .‬ﺇﺫﺍ ﻣﺎ ﻋﺎﻣﻠﻨﺎ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻛﻤﻨﺘﺞ ﺳﻨﺠﺪ ﺃﻧﻨﺎ ﻧﺮﺩ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻪ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺷﻴﺊ ﻻ‪ -‬ﺇﻥﺳﺎﻧﻲ ) ﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﺎ‬
‫ﻳﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ "ﺍﻟﺘﺮﺍﺟﻊ" ﻋﻦ ﺃﺻﻞ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ( ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﺻﺮﺭﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﻲ "ﻋﻮﺩﺓ" ﺇﻟﻲ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﺄﺻﻠﻪ ﺍﻝﺻﺤﻴﺢ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﻨﺎ ﻻ‬
‫ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻨﺎ ﺃﻥ ﻧﻔﻬﻢ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﺒﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﺭﻗﺔ ﺭﺑﻤﺎ ﺗﺸﺮﺡ ﻟﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﻬﻮﺱ ﺍﻟﻐﻴﺮ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺑﺎﻷﺻﻮﻝ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺃﻻ ﻳﻮﺟﺪ ﺃﺑﺪﺍً ﻣﺨﺮﺝ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻝﻣﻔﺎﺭﻗﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻛﻮﻥ ﺍﻹﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﺆﺹِﻝ ﻭﻣﺆﺹَﻝ‪ .‬ﻣﻊ ﺫﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻳﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺑﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﺭﺍء ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﺍﻷﺻﻞ ﻭﻓﺮﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﻲ‬
‫ﺣﺲ ﺃﻋﻤﻖ ﺑﺎﻷﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻧﻄﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺰﻣﺎﻥ ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﻓﻲ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻧﻴﺘﺸﻪ ﻭﻫﻴﺪﺟﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻳﺮﻓﺾ ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﻫﻴﺠﻞ ﻭﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻮﺩﺓ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺃﺻﻠﻨﺎ ﻛﺘﻌﻮﻳﺾ ﻣﻤﺘﻠﺌﻲ ﻟﻠﻮﺝﻭﺩ ﻭﺑﺪﻻً ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻳﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﻛﻤﻮﺍﺟﻬﺔ ﻣﻊ ﻋﺪﻣﻴﺔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻧﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ 5‬ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺷﺘﺒﺎﻙ ﺍﻷﺧﻴﺮ ﻟﻔﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﻧﺸﺄ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻹﻧﻌﻄﺎﻓﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﺟﺌﺔ ﺗﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻢ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺃﺧﺬﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻴﻠﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺧﻴﺮﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻪ‪.‬‬
‫"ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ " ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﺨﻄﻄﺎً ﻟﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻋﻤﻼً ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺪﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﻋﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺜﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺪ ﺍﻷﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﻧﺎﻗﺸﻨﺎﻩ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻛﺘﺒﻬﺎ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻨﺸﺮﻫﺎ ﺃﺑﺪﺍً‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺪ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻧﻲ "ﺇﻋﺘﺮﺍﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻠﺤﻢ "‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻊ ﺃﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻟﻠﺬﺍﺕ ﻑﻱ ﻣﻤﺎﺭﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﻋﺘﺮﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻴﺤﻲ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﺸﻐﻠﻪ ﺃﻥ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍً ﺟﻴﺪﺍً ﻟﻠﺘﻄﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻴﺤﻲ ﻳﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﻘﺎﺭﻧﺔ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻢ ﻟﻠﺬﺍﺕ ﺍﻷﺧﻼﻗﻴﺔ ﻭﻗﺪ ﻗﺎﻡ ﺑﻬﺬﺍ ﻓﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻴﻪ ﺍﻷﺧﻴﺮﻳﻦ )‪ (1984‬ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻹﻏﺮﻳﻖ ﻭﺍﻟﺮﻭﻣﺎﻥ‪ :‬ﺇﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻊ ﻭ ﺍﻹﻋﺘﻨﺎء ﺑﺎﻟﻨﻔﺲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻤﺔ ﺣﻮﻟﺖ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻺﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺑﻘﻀﺎﻳﺎ ﺃﺧﻼﻗﻴﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﺘﻀﻤﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻋﻤﺎﻟﻪ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻲ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻧﺎﺩﺭًﺍ‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﻮﺿﻊ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺻﺮﻳﺢ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻥ ﻫﺪﻓﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺪﺩ ﻫﻮ ﻣﻘﺎﺭﻧﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺛﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻤﺔ ﺑﺎﻷﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻴﺤﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ‪ -‬ﺇﺧﺘﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻭﺗﺘﺒﻊ ﺗﻄﻮﺭ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻴﺤﻴﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺲ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﻓﻜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺎً ﻟﻠﻘﺪﻣﺎء ‪ .‬ﻓﻲ ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻓﺈﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻆ ﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻴﺤﻴﺔ ﺏﺃﻥ ﺍﻷﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﻴﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﺷﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺫﺍﺗﻬﺎ ﻭﻭﺟﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻈﺮ ﺍﻹﻏﺮﻳﻘﻴﺔ‬

‫ﺃﻧﻬﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺧﻴﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺫﺍﺗﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻴﺔ ﻭﺿﺮﻭﺭﻳﺔ ﻭﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻟﻺﺳﺎءﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﻛﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﺒﺪﻻً ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﻛﻮﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺍﻷﺧﻼﻗﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻴﺤﻲ ﻳﻤﻨﻊ ﻣﻌﻈﻢ ﺃﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﺎﺭﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﻴﺔ )ﻭﺗﻘﻴﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﻕﻱ ﺑﺸﺪﺓ( ﺷﺪﺩ ﺍﻹﻏﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻣﺎء‬
‫ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻹﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻊ )‪ ، (chresis 10‬ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﻳﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﻣﺞ ﻣﻮﻋﺔ ﻛﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻷﻧﺸﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﻴﺔ )ﻏﻴﺮﻳﺔ ﺟﻨﺴﻴﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺜﻠﻴﺔ ﺟﻨﺴﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﺍﻟﺰﻭﺍﺝ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﻟﺰﻭﺍﺝ ( ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﺑﺈﻋﺘﺪﺍﻝ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ‪ .‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﻓﺎﻟﺠﻨﺲ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻹﻏﺮﻳﻖ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺟﺰءﺍً ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻴﺎً ﻣﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺳﻤﺎﻩ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ "ﺟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ‪ : "Aesthetics of the self‬ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﻟﺬﺍﺕ ﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ ﺟﻤﻴﻞ ﻭﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻤﺘﻊ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻠﻚ ﺍﻟﺪﺭﺍﺳﺎﺕ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻤﺔ ﻭﻋﻠﻲ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﻓﻜﺮﺓ ﺟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺲ ﻗﺎﺩﺕ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺇﻟﻲ ﺍﻟﻔﻜﺮﺓ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻤﺔ ﻋﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻛﺄﺳﻠﻮﺏ ﻟﻠﻌﻴﺶ ﻻ ﺑﺤﺜﺎً ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺎً ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻓﻲ "ﺇﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻊ " ﻟﺖﺻﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺃﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺇﻻ ﺃﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻟﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻭﺟﺪ ﻭﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﺎﺿﺮﺍﺗﻪ ﺍﻷﺧﻴﺮﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻟﻴﺞ‬
‫ﺩﻱ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺲ ﻭﺑﻴﺮﻛﻠﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺜﻤﺎﻧﻴﻨﺎﺕ ; ﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻟﺪﻳﻪ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﺖ ﻟﻴﻄﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﻟﻠﻨﺸﺮ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﺎﺿﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻟﻴﺞ ﺩﻱ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺲ‪ ،‬ﻳﻨﺎﻗﺶ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﻓﻲ )‪ (Alcibiades 1 & Apology‬ﻛﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ ﻭﻛﻤﻔﺴﺮ ﻟﻠﺤﻴﺎﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺮﻛﺰﺓ ﻋﻠﻲ "ﺍﻟﻌﻨﺎﻳﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﻔﺲ" ﻭﻳﺘﺘﺒﻊ ﻣﻨﺎﻗﺸﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻣﺎء ﺍﻟﻼﺣﻘﻴﻦ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻉ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﺇﺑﻜﺘﻴﺘﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﻨﻴﻜﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻮﺗﺎﺭﺥ‪ .‬ﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﺎﺿﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﻴﺮﻛﻠﻲ ﻳﺘﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻢ "ﺍﻟﻜﻼﻡ ﺍﻟﺼﺎﺩﻕ" )‪(Parrahesia‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﻭﻛﻔﻀﻴﻠﺔ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻳﺔ ‪ .‬ﻫﻨﺎ ﻳﻨﺎﻕﺵ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺃﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﻻﺣﻘﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻳﻮﺭﻳﺒﻴﺪﺱ ﻭﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﻭﺗﺤﻮﻻﺕ‬
‫ﻻﺣﻘﺔ ﻟﻪ ﻟﺪﻱ ﺍﻷﺑﻴﻘﻮﺭﻳﻴﻦ ﻭﺍﻟﺮﻭﺍﻗﻴﻴﻦ ﻭﺳﻴﻨﻴﻜﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺎﺗﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻤﻮﻋﺘﻴﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺎﺿﺮﺍﺕ ﺗﻤﺪﻧﺎ ﺑﻤﺎﺩﺓ ﺛﺮﻳﺔ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﺃﻛﺜﺮ ﺇﺷﺘﺒﺎﻛﺎﺕ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﻔﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ‬
‫ﺃﻫﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺇﺛﻤﺎﺭﺍً ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻣﻮﺗﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﺟﻲء ﺳﻨﺔ ‪ 1984‬ﻣﻦﻋﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻳﻜﻤﻞ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻋﻪ‬

‫‪10‬‬

‫ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺇﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺸﻬﻮﺓ ﺍﻟﺠﻨﺴﻴﺔ ﻳﺠﺐ ﺍﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﻨﻈﻤﺎً ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ﻭﻟﻜﻦ ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺍﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺫﻟﻚ ﻳﻀﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻌﺔ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺃﺳﺎﺳﻲ‪.‬‬

‫ﻣﺮﺍﺟﻊ‬
Primary Sources









Essential Works of Foucault, 1954-1984, 3 volumes, edited by Paul Rabinow, New York:
The New Press, 1997-9.
Maladie mentale et personnalité, Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1954.
Maladie mentale et psychologie, Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1962 (Mental
Illness and Psychology, translated Alan Sheridan, New York: Harper and Row, 1976).
Folie et déraison, Paris: Gallimard, 1966 (Madness and Civilization, translated by Richard
Howard, New York: Pantheon, 1965).
Raymond Roussel, Paris: Gallimard, 1963 (Death and the Labyrinth: The World of
Raymond Roussel, translated by Charles Ruas, Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1986).
Naissance de la clinique, Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1963 (The Birth of the
Clinic, translated by A. Sheridan Smith, New York: Pantheon, 1973).
Les mots et les choses, Paris: Gallimard, 1966 (The Order of Things, New York: Vintage,
1973).
L'archéologie du savoir, Paris: Gallimard, 1969 (The Archaeology of Knowledge,
translated by A. Sheridan Smith, New York: Harper and Row, 1972).
Surveiller et punir, Paris: Gallimard, 1975 (Discipline and Punish, translated by Alan
Sheridan, New York: Pantheon, 1977).
Histoire de la sexualité, 3 volumes: La volonté de savoir, L'usage des plaisirs, and Le
souici de soi, Paris: Gallimard, 1976 (History of Sexuality, 3 volumes: Introduction, The
Uses of Pleasure, and Care of the Self, translated by Robert Hurley, New York: Vintage
Books, 1988-90).

Secondary Sources










Bernauer, James, 1990, Michel Foucault's Force of Flight, Atlantic Highlands, NJ:
Humanities Press.
Davidson, Arnold (ed.), 1997, Foucault and His Interlocutors, Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Dreyfus, H. and P. Rabinow, 1983, Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and
Hermeneutics, 2nd edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Flynn, Thomas, 2003, Sartre, Foucault, and Historical Reason, volume 2: A poststructuralist mapping of history, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gutting, Gary, 1989, Michel Foucault's Archaeology of Scientific Reason, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Gutting, Gary (ed.), 2005, The Cambridge Companion to Foucault, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, second edition.
Han, Béatrice, 2002, Foucault's Critical Project, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Hoy, David (ed.), 1986, Foucault: a Critical Reader, Oxford: Blackwell.
Macey, David, 1994, The Lives of Michel Foucault, New York: Pantheon.
McNay, Lois, 1994, Foucault: a Critical Introduction, Cambridge: Continuum.
Rajchman, John, 1985 Michel Foucault and the Freedom of Philosophy, New York:
Columbia University Press.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful