Esther Díaz defends Michel Foucault: “Nothing in his work does not praise or justify pedophilia”

“There is nothing in Foucault’s work which extols pedophilia, nor which justifies it from a distance”, he assures in dialogue with PROFILE Esther diaz, Doctor of philosophy, epistemologist and specialist in the work of Michel Foucault before the consultation for the accusations of the essayist Guy Sorman, who said that the famous philosopher sexually abused miners in the sixties.

In an interview for the British newspaper Sunday times, where he refers to what he revealed in his recent book My shit dictionaryGuy Sorman – economist, essayist and philosopher – said that during a visit to Tunisia with a group of friends in 1969, he learned that Foucault was paying children to have sex. Según dijo, vio que los niños corrían por las calles del pueblo detrás del filósofo diciendo: “¿Y a mí por qué no? ¡Llévame también!” Y el les daba dinero a los niños para “encontrarse en el lugar habitual a las diez of the night”.

Díaz, essayist and author of Michel Foucault’s philosophy and who for his doctoral thesis in philosophy at UBA studied communication, power and ethics in the writings of the philosopher and essayist of the twentieth century, considers it an accusation “Opportunistic and contemptible”. He believes that it is possible to dissociate the work from the personal and moral ethics of its author, and also assures that “there is nothing” in his heritage that can be linked to the sexual abuse of minors.

Michael Foucault accused of abusing children in Tunisia

“What’s your take on the charges?”

“It seems to me from Sorman’s point of view something totally opportunistic, despicable.” I understand that journalism needs information and has to echo a scandal like this, but what a coincidence that he remembers making this complaint now that he is going to release a book, because no one knows him. He hanged himself on Foucault’s skin.

– Beyond the time that has passed and whether or not the facts can be verified today, does the lawsuit affect its legacy?

“Is this going to save someone?” Is anyone going to be sued? Foucault is already dead, these guys, in case it was supposed to be true, there’s no way to find them. The first thing to ask is who benefits from this low blow, I think him, because in 24 hours internationally we are talking about him. Even if it was meant to be, what? Will this diminish the value of Foucault’s work by one iota? I wonder if anyone, right now, with how desperate we are to give ourselves the vaccine, is wondering if it was a pedophile or not who invented the COVID-19 vaccine. No one is asking for that, and surely, even if it was shown to be, we would continue to give it the same, as long as it was effective.

“Of course you can separate the work from the author”

In a petition signed in 1977 by Foucault, Simone de Beauvoir, Jean Paul Sartre, Roland Barthes, among others, intellectuals, spoke out in favor of the legalization of sexual relations between children and adults. They argued that those under 13 with rights in various areas of French law should also have them in sex life.

– In Michel Foucault’s work, is there anything related to this question?

– I am a doctor in Foucault’s work and pedophilia does not exist in his work. I read absolutely all of his work, I’m 81, because before I was 40 I studied it and that’s why I got a doctorate thanks to him. There is no eulogy in Foucault’s work that extols pedophilia, or even justifies it from a distance. In this case, it’s not that he wrote in favor of pedophilia or that there is concrete evidence that someone who has studied his works might tend to be a pedophile for this reason. It is a very big nonsense. The only sanction is to give the press to anyone who files a complaint after 50 years.

Why do we read Michel Foucault?

– What do you think of what is called the “culture of cancellation”?

– I am against the culture of cancellation, because in general it is done with similar interests to what Mr Sorman is doing at the moment, for personal gain or because of personal hatred of the one being attacked . With this I do not agree.

Does this mean that you consider that the author’s work can be “separated” in some way or another?

—Of course, the author’s work can be separated. If this were not so, I can assure you that 50% of the developments that human beings benefit from technoscience would be nullified, because those who do not have something morally unpleasant on their record. One thing is work, and another is personal ethics: whether he does what he wants with his sexual organs, with his bed and between his sheets, it has nothing to do with work. The example of a pandemic as we find ourselves is overwhelming, so far I have not read the private lives of any of the scientists who made the vaccine. Does this affect the development of the vaccine? Absolutely.