So after the work published by Derrida it seems that Foucault has no choice but to defend himself and his writings. He begin is rebuttal by claiming that Derrida is being too nitpicky. He seems to defend himself against most of the claims made by Derrida. Foucault begins by saying that Derrida has focused his entire critique on one small portion of Foucault work, his uses of Descartes, and he takes great offense to this. Through several sections of his works he quotes Descartes and uses this to refute his claims. Examples of this can be found in his explanation of Dreams versus Madness and well as the “good” and “bad” examples.
Foucault responded to Derrida’s critique when he published the second edition of his book. Foucault responds by explaining in so many words that his intention was not to write the history of that language, but rather the archaeology of madness as we discussed in class. Foucault also makes a dismissive reference to Derrida’s philosophical practices. Foucault argues that “We should not try to justify the old book…we should not pretend to discover in it a secret reserve…I will add only two texts…where I try to address a remarkable criticism by Derrida” . Foucault argues that Derrida asserts arguments into his work that are not necessarily there. There are some points when Foucault gives Derrida credit for his assertions and their evidence but quickly discounts them with his own sources but claiming Derrida’s misunderstanding of the original Latin texts and claiming he understands Desartes meaning in his texts, when Foucault believes he does not. His final blow and a fine one comes with the final line of the text stating, “But as only the wise can distinguish what is clearly conceived from what only seems and appears to be so, I am not surprised that this fellow can’t tell the difference between them.”
