What was the primary issue(s) or problem(s) for Foucault in defining Essay

What was the primary issue(s) or problem(s) for Foucault in defining bill, as appeared in Nietzsche, Genealogy, History - Essay lesson(78). Thus according to Foucault invoice should not be a seamless attempt at identifying the natural origin of events. Peoples, cultures, but rather needs to portion out how this idea of the essence has been fabricated. Not only how it has been fabricated, but why people feel the need for some kind of essence is an essential part of history for Foucault.Thus the genealogy that appears in the title of Foucaults book should concern itself with the details, co-incidences and sheer accidents that underlie the beginnings of knowledge, values and cultures rather than a search for a non-existent origin. In this elbow room Foucault appears to support Nietzsches argument that traditional history sees itself as a tracing of development towards some kind of culmination that it sees itself as believing in an imperishable truth - whether it be of events, peop le, ideas, or religion. Nietzsche, and Foucault subscribes to the same vox populi, suggests that what Foucault calls effective history can only be reached by seeing events as divergent, discordant and essentially in conflict. As Foucault puts it, it should call for the shattering of the unity of mans being, as everything that has been considered to be immutable and immortal must in fact be placed inwardly history. Thus they become mutable and mortal.Foucault, as is o Foucault, as is very much the case within his work, focuses on the human body as a locale for this kind of history. Thus the body is molded by a great many distinct regimes it is broken down by the rhythms of work, rest and holidays it is poisoned by victuals or values, through eating habits or moral laws it constructs resistances (87). Thus a history of the body, which Foucault attempts in other works, would involve identify these distinct regimes that shape the body, often conflicting with one another and thus c reating stress upon the human being. Foucault argues that effective history should move form the distant, remote vantage point of traditional history towards a closeness. It needs to look at the details of life, identifying their contradictions, rather than at the universal processes and themes that may actually camouflage the reality of events. This closeness should not involve an emotional connection with the subject, but rather an alienated view. Overall, Foucault argues that the role of historian as is commonly perceived and practiced leads to a false view of history rather than the contrar7y. Thus the attempt to gain absolute and comprehensive knowledge of history, through reducing events to their simplest elements in order to explain them actually avoids the professedly complexity of history. The traditional type of historian is in fact centered on himself and thus paints the world through his particular biases and opinions, rather than seeing the connatural complexity and c onflicts that occur within history. Foucault argues that it is necessary to revolt against his type of history if the true constitution of it is to be understood, and if it is to really inform the present and the future. To conclude, Foucault essentially dissects the nature of History as it is normally performed within the academic world, suggesting that that attempt to find universal truths in fact masks the actual reality of the world. He