Many of the writings of Leo Strauss were dedicated to combating the "crisis of modernity". This crisis was for him the advent and acceptance of nihilism--a state of being wherein any principle one dare dream is allowed and judgment must be withheld. He claimed that the promotion of nihilism at the hands of modern social scientists would lead to the downfall of civilization. Yet, this work seeks to show that all of these claims are made by Strauss in an attempt to hide the "truth" of nihilism from the masses and that Strauss, in fact, is a nihilist thinker. The introductory chapter of this work introduces the problem of nihilism as outlined by Strauss. It also briefly explains the positions of two other nihilist thinkers, Friedrich Nietzsche and Michel Foucault, in order to establish the thought which Strauss seems to be arguing against in his works. It then explains the writing style of Strauss as being esoteric. The following chapter will deal with the Strauss' argument for the causes of nihilism. Chapter three will be dedicated to the two solutions that Strauss presents for combating nihilism. The exoteric solution calls for a return to the teachings of the classics, specifically the three types of teaching that he recognizes--Socratic-Platonic, Aristotelian, and Thomistic. The esoteric solution, however, is to use the Platonic conception of the "noble lie" in order to hide the "truth" of nihilism. Chapters four and five will compare Strauss' nihilism to that of Nietzsche and Foucault, respectively. Each chapter will expand on the discussion already presented in the first chapter to further elucidate each thinker's version of nihilism. Finally, I will outline the conception of these three thinkers as a continuum for nihilist thought. I will also discuss how the only definitive difference between the three thinkers is their outlook on the human condition. For example, Strauss and his hidden nihilism is a direct result of his pessimistic view of the masses; whereas Nietzsche's Übermensch nihilism is brought about by his outlook on the prospect for development beyond humanity and Foucault's pure nihilism is drawn out from his notion of power/knowledge. In this way, this work will not only show Strauss as a closet nihilist but also show his integral role in understanding the full range of nihilist thought.

Partindo das considerações de que os termos sujeito e subjetividade permeiam o discurso psicanalítico contemporâneo e de que são, direta e indiretamente, atribuídos a Freud a despeito de ele próprio nunca tê-los conceituado, esta pesquisa tem como objetivo caracterizar um perfil de sujeito a partir do discurso freudiano. O trabalho orientou-se pela metodologia da Análise Institucional do Discurso, uma analítica do domínio subjetivo que toma o discurso em seu caráter de ato e acontecimento. Primeiramente se realizou um estudo de As técnicas de si, de Michel Foucault, de modo a permitir o circunstanciamento da psicanálise como uma técnica que produz um si, um sujeito este circunstanciamento permitiu, então, tomar sujeito e subjetividade na qualidade de produções histórica, geográfica e analiticamente contextualizadas, não como formas de imanência ou transcendência. A partir desse pressuposto, elaborou-se uma análise institucional do discurso de O mal-estar na civilização que privilegiou não apenas seu conteúdo, mas principalmente seu modo de produção, colocando em relevo o contexto presente no texto, as interlocuções que se criam, os lugares atribuídos e ocupados, as expectativas assim mobilizadas, as estratégias discursivas utilizadas, os jogos de poder e verdade exercidos, bem como os efeitos de reconhecimento e desconhecimento então facultados. Esta análise mostrou que Freud exerce uma perspectiva de interioridade, pois o mal-estar que acomete a civilização é compreendido em analogia à concepção psicanalítica de desenvolvimento individual, explicando, em suma, a cultura pelo prisma do indivíduo; evidenciou que as teorizações sobre a vida instintiva são a principal sustentação do discurso sobre o mal-estar da civilização; apontou como as estratégias discursivas utilizadas por Freud promovem a subjetivação, por parte do leitor, daquilo que seu discurso produz como verdade; e que o conceito de indivíduo é ocasião de exercício daquela perspectiva de interioridade e de atualização dos pressupostos teóricos. Com base nisso, pôde-se caracterizar um sujeito universal; psicologizado; determinado sobretudo pelos movimentos da sexualidade e da agressividade; cuja tônica recai sobre o dito mundo interno; dotado de origens e propósitos concernentes à vida instintiva; e cujo perfil é delimitado pela tarefa de administração dos instintos, isto é, cujo perfil se dá entre os imperativos superegóicos de renúncia e a margem de liberdade de que dispõe para satisfazer as exigências do princípio de prazer. Observou-se também, na esteira do pontuado por Guirado (2010), que em geral Freud naturaliza os termos do discurso teórico, fazendo de sua universalização a condição e o limite para se pensar o domínio subjetivo e a singularidade; diferentemente de Foucault, que compreende esse domínio em referência às relações de poder e saber, de forma contextualizada. Do ponto de vista da análise institucional do discurso freudiano, concluiu-se, finalmente, que o si ao qual a técnica psicanalítica dá lastro é efeito da perspectiva exercida por Freud, que promove o reconhecimento da interioridade instintiva como crivo da civilização, de um modo de vida e de si mesmo / From the considerations that the terms \"subject\" and \"subjectivity\" permeate the contemporary psychoanalytic discourse and that are directly and indirectly attributed to Freud despite himself never have them conceptualized, this research aims to characterize a profile of \"subject\" derived from the Freudian discourse. The work was guided by the methodology of Institutional Analysis of Discourse, an analytic of the subjective domain which takes the discourse in his character of act and event. First, a study was conducted of the Technologies of the self, of Michel Foucault, to circumstantiate psychoanalysis as a technology that produces a \"self\", a \"subject\" this circumstantiality allowed, then, take \"subject\" and \"subjectivity\" as productions historical, geographic and analytically contextualized, not as forms of immanence or transcendence. From this assumption, we drew up an institutional analysis of discourse of Civilization and its discontents that focused not only its content, but primarily their mode of production, putting in relief the context present in the text, the interlocutions that are created, the assigned and occupied places, the expectations then mobilized, the discursive strategies used, the games of power and truth exercised, and the effects of recognition and disowning then provided. This analysis showed that Freud exerts a perspective of interiority, because the discontents that affects the civilization is understood in analogy to the psychoanalytic conception of individual development, explaining, in short, the culture through the individual prism; It showed that the theories on the instinctual life are the main support of the discourse about civilization and its discontents; it pointed out how the discursive strategies used by Freud promotes the subjectivation, on the part of the reader, of what his discourse produces as truth; and that the concept of \"individual\" is the opportunity to exercise that perspective of interiority and update the theoretical assumptions. Based on this, it was possible to characterize a subject that is universal; psychologized; determined mainly by sexuality and aggression movements; whose tonic lies on the called interior world; endowed with origins and purposes concerning instinctual life; and whose profile is delimited by the administration task of instincts, that is, whose profile constitutes between the superegoic imperatives of waiver and the margin of freedom that has to satisfy the requirements of the pleasure principle. It was also observed, in the wake of punctuated by Guirado (2010), which generally Freud naturalizes the terms of theoretical discourse, making it universalization the condition and the limit to think about the subjective domain and singularity; unlike Foucault, which understands this domain in reference to the relations of power and knowledge, in a contextualized way. From the perspective of institutional analysis of the Freudian discourse, it was concluded, finally, that the self to which the psychoanalytic technology gives ballast is an effect of the perspective exerted by Freud, which promotes the recognition of the instinctive interiority as a lens of the civilization, of a way of life and of yourself

Partindo das considerações de que os termos sujeito e subjetividade permeiam o discurso psicanalítico contemporâneo e de que são, direta e indiretamente, atribuídos a Freud a despeito de ele próprio nunca tê-los conceituado, esta pesquisa tem como objetivo caracterizar um perfil de sujeito a partir do discurso freudiano. O trabalho orientou-se pela metodologia da Análise Institucional do Discurso, uma analítica do domínio subjetivo que toma o discurso em seu caráter de ato e acontecimento. Primeiramente se realizou um estudo de As técnicas de si, de Michel Foucault, de modo a permitir o circunstanciamento da psicanálise como uma técnica que produz um si, um sujeito este circunstanciamento permitiu, então, tomar sujeito e subjetividade na qualidade de produções histórica, geográfica e analiticamente contextualizadas, não como formas de imanência ou transcendência. A partir desse pressuposto, elaborou-se uma análise institucional do discurso de O mal-estar na civilização que privilegiou não apenas seu conteúdo, mas principalmente seu modo de produção, colocando em relevo o contexto presente no texto, as interlocuções que se criam, os lugares atribuídos e ocupados, as expectativas assim mobilizadas, as estratégias discursivas utilizadas, os jogos de poder e verdade exercidos, bem como os efeitos de reconhecimento e desconhecimento então facultados. Esta análise mostrou que Freud exerce uma perspectiva de interioridade, pois o mal-estar que acomete a civilização é compreendido em analogia à concepção psicanalítica de desenvolvimento individual, explicando, em suma, a cultura pelo prisma do indivíduo; evidenciou que as teorizações sobre a vida instintiva são a principal sustentação do discurso sobre o mal-estar da civilização; apontou como as estratégias discursivas utilizadas por Freud promovem a subjetivação, por parte do leitor, daquilo que seu discurso produz como verdade; e que o conceito de indivíduo é ocasião de exercício daquela perspectiva de interioridade e de atualização dos pressupostos teóricos. Com base nisso, pôde-se caracterizar um sujeito universal; psicologizado; determinado sobretudo pelos movimentos da sexualidade e da agressividade; cuja tônica recai sobre o dito mundo interno; dotado de origens e propósitos concernentes à vida instintiva; e cujo perfil é delimitado pela tarefa de administração dos instintos, isto é, cujo perfil se dá entre os imperativos superegóicos de renúncia e a margem de liberdade de que dispõe para satisfazer as exigências do princípio de prazer. Observou-se também, na esteira do pontuado por Guirado (2010), que em geral Freud naturaliza os termos do discurso teórico, fazendo de sua universalização a condição e o limite para se pensar o domínio subjetivo e a singularidade; diferentemente de Foucault, que compreende esse domínio em referência às relações de poder e saber, de forma contextualizada. Do ponto de vista da análise institucional do discurso freudiano, concluiu-se, finalmente, que o si ao qual a técnica psicanalítica dá lastro é efeito da perspectiva exercida por Freud, que promove o reconhecimento da interioridade instintiva como crivo da civilização, de um modo de vida e de si mesmo / From the considerations that the terms \"subject\" and \"subjectivity\" permeate the contemporary psychoanalytic discourse and that are directly and indirectly attributed to Freud despite himself never have them conceptualized, this research aims to characterize a profile of \"subject\" derived from the Freudian discourse. The work was guided by the methodology of Institutional Analysis of Discourse, an analytic of the subjective domain which takes the discourse in his character of act and event. First, a study was conducted of the Technologies of the self, of Michel Foucault, to circumstantiate psychoanalysis as a technology that produces a \"self\", a \"subject\" this circumstantiality allowed, then, take \"subject\" and \"subjectivity\" as productions historical, geographic and analytically contextualized, not as forms of immanence or transcendence. From this assumption, we drew up an institutional analysis of discourse of Civilization and its discontents that focused not only its content, but primarily their mode of production, putting in relief the context present in the text, the interlocutions that are created, the assigned and occupied places, the expectations then mobilized, the discursive strategies used, the games of power and truth exercised, and the effects of recognition and disowning then provided. This analysis showed that Freud exerts a perspective of interiority, because the discontents that affects the civilization is understood in analogy to the psychoanalytic conception of individual development, explaining, in short, the culture through the individual prism; It showed that the theories on the instinctual life are the main support of the discourse about civilization and its discontents; it pointed out how the discursive strategies used by Freud promotes the subjectivation, on the part of the reader, of what his discourse produces as truth; and that the concept of \"individual\" is the opportunity to exercise that perspective of interiority and update the theoretical assumptions. Based on this, it was possible to characterize a subject that is universal; psychologized; determined mainly by sexuality and aggression movements; whose tonic lies on the called interior world; endowed with origins and purposes concerning instinctual life; and whose profile is delimited by the administration task of instincts, that is, whose profile constitutes between the superegoic imperatives of waiver and the margin of freedom that has to satisfy the requirements of the pleasure principle. It was also observed, in the wake of punctuated by Guirado (2010), which generally Freud naturalizes the terms of theoretical discourse, making it universalization the condition and the limit to think about the subjective domain and singularity; unlike Foucault, which understands this domain in reference to the relations of power and knowledge, in a contextualized way. From the perspective of institutional analysis of the Freudian discourse, it was concluded, finally, that the self to which the psychoanalytic technology gives ballast is an effect of the perspective exerted by Freud, which promotes the recognition of the instinctive interiority as a lens of the civilization, of a way of life and of yourself

Mishima Yukio premiered the play Rokumeikan in 1956 and published it in 1957. For more than half a century, this play has been praised as one of the finest Japanese plays in the Post-War period. Rokumeikan is a multi-act tragic melodrama, set in 1886 (Meiji Period) in the Rokumeikan building. The play intertwines complex political cabals, intense loves and hatreds, and multiple deceptions embodying the conflict between political power and love. This essay explores the reasons why Rokumeikan has maintained its popularity over its fifty year long performance history and examines the critical reception of the play. My analysis of the Rokumeikan text is based on conflicting notions of truth and power. According to the French philosopher, Michel Foucault, socio-political power creates truth. This "power reality" is embodied in the play by Prime Minister Kageyama, and its authority is challenged by his wife, Asako, who has an entirely different conception of truth. This interplay of conflicting values has helped to maintain the popularity and stature of the play for half a century.

A genealogical framework highlights the important role sexuality has played in constructing the current label of intellectual disability (ID). The genealogical framework is meant to replace the social, medical, and/or rights-based model(s) that have dominated social work and social services working in the disability field. With this framework, or perspective, I use a Foucaultian discourse analysis to read through seminal texts regarding person-centered practice. Person-centered practice is the foremost intervention used in social work, and other disciplines, to work with people labeled with intellectual disability. My research questions focus on what is revealed about ID in PCP through a genealogical framework and what implications do these discoveries hold for sexuality education and social services, including social workers? Predetermined concepts taken from the genealogical framework are used in the Foucaultian discourse analysis. These concepts (subject, government, biopower, and normalization) provide insight into how ID has been constructed and maintained through the practice of person-centered processes. Paradoxes emerge throughout the analysis, providing space for productive resistance by professionals working in sexuality education and social services to improve equity for people labeled with intellectual disability, specifically regarding their sexuality and healthy expression of it.

Although Foucault did not address the question of the animal, he asserted the assessment of whether a new politics of truth can be constituted as "the essential political problem" (1980, p. 134). Though the "essential political problem" may be considered as it relates to the politics of truth about animals, a Foucaultian perspective does not allow a prediction in response, other than the recognition that change may occur. What is understood to be "true" about animals may change if the relationships between events that exist at a given time ("conditions") require the emergence of a different way of knowing. This Foucaultian critique of thought about animals examines "truth" about animals as an historical contingency, variable according to the conditions that have allowed its production. This project contributes to the development of a theoretical context of the politics of truth about animals. The politics of truth about animals is understood to be the push and pull of knowledge generated and perpetuated about them, together with concurrent power apparatuses in support of that knowledge as well as the ever present resistance to that power. By applying and extending Foucault's theory of power -that is, that knowledge is a carrier of power, power is a perpetuator of knowledge, and all power relations have resistances - this work employs Foucault's archaeological method to uncover dominant and subjugated discourses about animals and to describe power-knowledge associated with statements about animals that are understood to convey true things. This project describes the changeable nature of "truth" about animals and, necessarily, the politics of it, since the politics of truth is understood to be propelled by whichever knowledge and associated power are then dominant. Statements in "error" are also examined as resistance to power-knowledge about animals. The project describes subjugated discourses about animals that have been understood in various times and places to have truth-telling powers or, at least, to have been understood as "error," which provided points of resistance to the dominant discourse. It describes the partial derivation of discourse about animals by examining dominant discourses (e.g., the discourse of law and the discourse of lines) and subjugated discourses (e.g., animals are not personal property, karmic discourse, transmigration of souls discourse, rational animal discourse). Additionally, it describes like disperse statements among different referents (i.e., slave, animal, woman) that comprise various discursive formations that have been understood at various times to have truth-telling power about different referents. Subjugated discourse sometimes emerges as new "truth," though no such prediction can be made. To illustrate the point, the project describes the emergence of the new academic field related to the question of the animal, which resurrects or draws from some subjugated discourse (e.g., animals are not personal property).

In 2002 New Zealand�s government set out to "accelerate" the nation�s "transformation into a knowledge society" (Ministry of Education, 2002a, p. 16). Underpinning the development of this so-called 'knowledge society' was a new approach in the way tertiary education was funded. This included introducing a new contestable model of research funding called Performance-Based Research Funding (PBRF). The research reported here was conducted at a critical juncture in the ongoing development and implementation of PBRF because it captures the experiences of fifteen academics as they encounter PBRF and the Quality Evaluation exercise for the first time. Their experiences of the inaugural 2003 Quality Evaluation exercise were examined using a discourse analysis approach informed by Michel Foucault�s (1926-1984) ideas of 'subjection' and 'governmentality'. 'Subjection' occurs when individuals shape their identities by responding to the multiple discourses that are available to them at any particular time and within any historical context (Foucault, 1969). 'Governmentality' refers to a particular instrument, technique or activity that guides and shapes conduct by producing a compliant human subject capable of supporting the interests and objectives of the state (Foucault, 1994a). In the case of academics this might mean conforming to PBRF policies and practices and participating in the development and transformation of a new 'knowledge society'. In this thesis I examine the potential for PBRF to reshape and redirect the nature of research and suggest that some assessment elements of the 2003 Quality Evaluation were flawed and, as a result, a number of participants in this study were now making decisions about their research that appeared contrary to their best interests. I also investigate PBRF as a field of compliance and argue that the Quality Evaluation exercise represents a technology of government that targets the activities and practices of New Zealand�s research academics with the effect of manifesting a more docile and compliant academic subject. I then question PBRF�s impact on the career aspirations and opportunities of academics and claim that the PBRF Quality Evaluation framework has already shifted from being a mechanism for distributing funds for research to one that identifies and rewards the most 'talented' researchers via institutional appointments and promotions. Finally, I interrogate the pursuit and practice of academic freedom and argue that as a consequence of PBRF, a number of participants in this study have positioned themselves in ways that could diminish and constrain their traditional rights to academic freedom. PBRF has the potential to locate academics within a new status-driven hierarchy of professional validation whereby the Quality Evaluation exercise will purportedly measure, evaluate and reward the most 'talented' researchers and the 'best' research. In this thesis I argue that the PBRF Quality Evaluation framework operates as a form of disciplinary power exercised as part of an international trend of intensifying audit and assessment practices in higher education. In this sense, I claim that PBRF exists as an instrument of governmentality capable of constituting a new type of academic subject by significantly shifting the way academics will have to think and conduct their professional selves in relation to their work and research.

In 2002 New Zealand�s government set out to "accelerate" the nation�s "transformation into a knowledge society" (Ministry of Education, 2002a, p. 16). Underpinning the development of this so-called 'knowledge society' was a new approach in the way tertiary education was funded. This included introducing a new contestable model of research funding called Performance-Based Research Funding (PBRF). The research reported here was conducted at a critical juncture in the ongoing development and implementation of PBRF because it captures the experiences of fifteen academics as they encounter PBRF and the Quality Evaluation exercise for the first time. Their experiences of the inaugural 2003 Quality Evaluation exercise were examined using a discourse analysis approach informed by Michel Foucault�s (1926-1984) ideas of 'subjection' and 'governmentality'. 'Subjection' occurs when individuals shape their identities by responding to the multiple discourses that are available to them at any particular time and within any historical context (Foucault, 1969). 'Governmentality' refers to a particular instrument, technique or activity that guides and shapes conduct by producing a compliant human subject capable of supporting the interests and objectives of the state (Foucault, 1994a). In the case of academics this might mean conforming to PBRF policies and practices and participating in the development and transformation of a new 'knowledge society'. In this thesis I examine the potential for PBRF to reshape and redirect the nature of research and suggest that some assessment elements of the 2003 Quality Evaluation were flawed and, as a result, a number of participants in this study were now making decisions about their research that appeared contrary to their best interests. I also investigate PBRF as a field of compliance and argue that the Quality Evaluation exercise represents a technology of government that targets the activities and practices of New Zealand�s research academics with the effect of manifesting a more docile and compliant academic subject. I then question PBRF�s impact on the career aspirations and opportunities of academics and claim that the PBRF Quality Evaluation framework has already shifted from being a mechanism for distributing funds for research to one that identifies and rewards the most 'talented' researchers via institutional appointments and promotions. Finally, I interrogate the pursuit and practice of academic freedom and argue that as a consequence of PBRF, a number of participants in this study have positioned themselves in ways that could diminish and constrain their traditional rights to academic freedom. PBRF has the potential to locate academics within a new status-driven hierarchy of professional validation whereby the Quality Evaluation exercise will purportedly measure, evaluate and reward the most 'talented' researchers and the 'best' research. In this thesis I argue that the PBRF Quality Evaluation framework operates as a form of disciplinary power exercised as part of an international trend of intensifying audit and assessment practices in higher education. In this sense, I claim that PBRF exists as an instrument of governmentality capable of constituting a new type of academic subject by significantly shifting the way academics will have to think and conduct their professional selves in relation to their work and research.