RESUMO: O presente artigo pretende problematizar, preliminarmente, o "problema antropológico" segundo a arqueologia de Michel Foucault. Partindo de teses populares da Psicologia, em particular, e das ciências humanas, em geral, sobre o "Homem", este texto primeiramente correlaciona essas teses com as problemáticas dos textos foucaultianos dos anos 1950, a Introdução a Sonho e Existência e Maladie Mentale et Personnalité, para então mostrar como os textos "arqueológicos" do autor se configuram como respostas iniciais às questões dos textos de 1954, já começando (...) pelos textos publicados em 1957. Os exemplares privilegiados são História da Loucura e As Palavras e as Coisas: após circunscrever aspectos singulares de cada argumentação, o artigo pretende explorar em que sentido os textos se reúnem sob a questão mais geral de uma crítica arqueológica à questão antropológica dos "saberes" modernos. //////////////// ABSTRACT: This article aims to discuss, on a preliminary basis, the "anthropological question" in the context of Michel Foucault's "archeological" texts. The paper starts with some popular assertions and postulates regarding "man" in the human sciences, based on historical examples in the history of psychology. Secondly, the article correlates these postulates with Foucauldian texts published in the 1950s, each one providing a singular project for an anthropological view. Finally, it is shown how the "archaeological" texts can be read as initial responses to the questions formulated in 1954 and 1957. The analysis concentrates on Madness and Civilization and The Order of Things, exploring the differences of each argument and discussing how each book contemplates the general question of an archaeological criticism of the anthropological problem. (shrink)

Psychological terms, such as ‘mind’, ‘memory’, ‘emotion’ and indeed ‘psychology’ itself, have a history. This history, I argue, supports the view that basic psychological categories refer to historical and social entities, and not to ‘natural kinds’. The case is argued through a wide ranging review of the historiography of western psychology, first, in connection with the field’s extreme modern diversity; second, in relation to the possible antecedents of the field in the early modern period; and lastly, through a brief introduction (...) to usage of the words ‘soul’, ‘mind’, ‘memory’ and ‘emotion’. The discussion situates the history of psychology within a large historical context, questions assumptions about the continuity of meaning, and draws out implications for the philosophical and social constitution of ‘psychology’ and ‘the psychological’ from the existing literature. The historical evidence, this paper concludes, does not support the conventional presumption that modern psychological terms describe ‘natural kinds’. (shrink)