From Archeology to Geneaology: The Problematique of Rupture/Continiuty in Foucault’s Methodology

Alavipour, Mohsen; Ostovar Masoud, Reza

doi:10.30465/os.2026.53737.2088

From Archeology to Geneaology: The Problematique of Rupture/Continiuty in Foucault’s Methodology

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Mohsen Alavipour ¹

reza ostovar masoud ²

¹ Associate Professor at the Research Institute for Political, International, and Legal Studies, Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies

² M.A. in Political Science, Tarbiat Modares University

10.30465/os.2026.53737.2088

Abstract

Introduction:
This study examines a major transformation in Michel Foucault’s methodology: the shift from the archaeological approach to the genealogical one. Initially, Foucault focused on archaeology to uncover the hidden rules behind the formation of knowledge, discursive structures, and fundamental concepts of each historical period. Rather than focusing on the subject or consciousness, this approach emphasized the structures that determine what qualifies as “knowledge.” Key concepts such as episteme, discourse, and archive are central to this approach. Foucault demonstrates that history is not linear and continuous but is shaped by epistemological ruptures.
However, in the mid-1970s, Foucault realized that archaeology was insufficient to explain the role of power in the formation of knowledge and subjectivity. Thus, influenced by Nietzsche, he turned to genealogy. In this new approach, rather than focusing solely on linguistic rules of knowledge, Foucault emphasized power struggles, embodiment, subject formation, and the entanglement of knowledge/power. In genealogy, concepts like “truth” are not seen as absolute but as products of power structures. Furthermore, genealogy does not seek origins but investigates the diverse and contingent conditions of emergence and transformation.
A central question that arises here is the relationship between these two methodological approaches. Some argue that the transition reflects a rupture. In their view, Foucault abandons archaeology due to its inadequacy in explaining social experience and the discursive formation of the present. In such understanding, the centrality of power/knowledge in Foucault’s later works marks a radical and critical turn toward political engagement. Others contend that genealogy is not a denial of archaeology; but rather its evolution: an enriched methodology that adds new dimensions to the earlier approach, making it more robust and strategic.
Among these perspectives, Gilles Deleuze offers a unique interpretation with his concept of folding. He suggests that the shift occurs internally: archaeology and genealogy are intertwined and mutually reflective, like two sides of a woven fabric. Thus, speaking of a strict methodological rupture is inadequate.
Materials & Methods:
This study is explicitly methodological and requires a conceptual framework. Core concepts from both archaeological and genealogical approaches are extracted from Foucault’s various works. Since Foucault often avoids giving clear definitions, preferring to elaborate through archival and historical research, the study employs an interpretive approach to derive reliable definitions from his writings.
Discussion & Result:
Ultimately, it is argued that archaeology and genealogy should not be seen as distinct and disconnected; rather, they represent different levels of a unified project. One describes the discursive mechanisms, while the other analyzes political power and subjectivity. Folding is the key concept that reveals how external rules of knowledge are internalized within the subject, shaping processes of subject formation and vice versa. This approach provides a deeper understanding of Foucault’s intellectual project and offers a way to grasp history, power, and truth as dynamic and intertwined phenomena.
Conclusion:
The study concludes that contrary to the view that this methodological shift represents a rupture, it is actually a deeper continuity within Foucault’s intellectual project. While genealogy introduces more politically engaged tools, Foucault’s fundamental concern remains the analysis of power and truth. Deleuze’s concept of folding illustrates that this is not a break but a continuous interplay between power, knowledge, and subject formation. He identifies three methodological axes in Foucault’s work—knowledge (archaeology), power (genealogy), and subject formation (later period)—not as separate stages but as interconnected processes of internalization and reflexivity.

Keywords

Archeology

Genealogy

Methodological Transformation

Michel Foucault

Bibliography:

- Akbari, Younes (2014), Foucault’s Archeology and Genealogy: Crossing Common History, in: New History, No. 7, pp.24-49. [in Persian]

- Akrami, Mousa & Ajdarian Shad, Zoleikha (2012), Genealogy from Nietzsche to Foucalt, in: Methodology in Humanities, No. 70, pp. 7-32. [in Persian]

- Deleuze, Gilles (2010), Foucault, trans. by: A. Jahandide & N. Sarkhosh, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- Dreyfus, Herbert, & Rabinow, Paul (2005), Michael Foucault: Beyond Structuralism & Hermeneutics, tran. by: H. Bashirie, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- Foucault, Michael (1980), Nietzsche, Genealogy, History, in: Michel Foucault, Language, Counter-memory, Practice, trans. by: D. Bouchard & Sh. Simon, New York, Cornell University Press, pp. 139-164.

- --------------------- (1997), Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth: Essential Works of Foucault, 1954-1984, Vol. 1, Ed. by P. Rabinow, New York, The New Press.

- --------------------- (2005), Subject & Power, in: Michael Foucault: Beyond Structuralism & Hermeneutics, by: Dreyfus, H., & Rabinow, P., tran. by: H. Bashirie, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- --------------------- (2010), Order of the Things, trans. by: Y. Emami, Tehran, Institute for Social and Cultural Studies. [in Persian]

- --------------------- (2011a), History of Madness, trans. by: A. Jahandide, & N. Sarkhosh, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- --------------------- (2011b), The Birth of the Clinic, trans. by: Y. Emami, Tehran Naghsh-o-Negar Publication. [in Persian]

- --------------------- (2017), The Will to Knowledge, trans. by: A. Jahandide, & N. Sarkhosh, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- --------------------- (2018), Discipline and Punish, trans. By: A. Jahandide, & N. Sarkhosh, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- --------------------- (2019), Theatre of Philosophy, trans. By: A. Jahandide, & N. Sarkhosh, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- --------------------- (2020), Archeology of Knowledge, trans. By: A. Jahandide, & N. Sarkhosh, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- Fraser, N. (1981), Foucault on Modern Power: Empirical Insights and Normative Confusions, Praxis, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 272-287

- Garland, D. (2014). What is a “history of the present”? On Foucault’s genealogies and their critical preconditions. Punishment & Society, 16(4), 365-384.

- Garrottan, D. (2014), Genealogy, in: The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon, ed. by L. Lawlor & J. Nale, Cambridgr, Cambridge University Press.

- Ghahremani, Meitham (2020), Foucault’s Methodology as Becoming Subject, in: Critical Studies of Texts and Programs of Human Sciences, Vol. 20, No. 9, pp. 197-215. [in Persian]

- Gutting, G. (1989), Michel Foucault’s Archeology of Scientific Reason, Cambridge, Cambridge University press

- Gutting, G. (2005), Foucault: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

- Habermas, J. (1987), The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, tr. By F. Lawrence, MIT Press.

- Hosseinzade Yazdi, Mehdi, Renani, Monire, & Mollabashi, Seyedmohsen (2015a), Epistemological Basis of Foucault’s Genealogy, in: Occidental Studies, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 51-73. [in Persian]

- Hosseinzade Yazdi, Mehdi, Renani, Monire, & Mollabashi, Seyedmohsen (2015b), Epistemological Basis of Foucault’s Archeology, in: Islam & Social Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp 123-154. [in Persian]

- Kendal, Gavin, & Wickham, Gary (2023), Using Foucault’s Methods, trans. by: H. Norouzi, Shavand Publication. [in Persian]

- Khaleqi, Ahmad (2003), Power, Language, Everyday Life in Philosophical Discourse, Tehran, Gam-e Nou Publication. [in Persian]

- May, T. (2006), The Philosophy of Foucault, London, Acumen Publishing.

- O’Farrell, C. (2005), Michel Foucault, London & New York, Sage Publication.

- Sherratt, Yvonne (2023), Continental Philosophy of Social Science, trans. by: H. Jalili, Tehran, Ney Publication. [in Persian]

- Shirazi, Mohammad, & Aqa-Ahmadi, Qorbanali (2009), Foucault’s Archeology & Genealogy as a Counter-current Methodology in Social Science, in: Social Science Studies, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 103-126. [in Persian]

- Tadjik, Mohammadreza (1999), Post-Modernism and Discourse Analysis and Power/Knowledge, Tehran, Islamic Culture Publication. [in Persian]

- Zare Mehrjerdi, Masoud, Yousefi, Ali, & Mirabi, Saide (2020), Post-Theoretical Analysis of Foucault’s Archeology, in: Critical Studies of Texts and Programs of Human Sciences, Vol. 20, No. 12, pp. 197-220. [in Persian]