Archaeology analyzes local discourses while genealogy deploys the knowledges those analyses release

Evidence

To put it in a nutshell: Archaeology is the method specific to the analysis of local discursivities, and genealogy is the tactic which, once it has described these local discursivities, brings into play the desubjugated knowledges that have been released from them. — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 29

Archaeology is the method specific to the analysis of local discursivities, and genealogy is the tactic which, once it has described these local discursivities, brings into play the desubjugated knowledges that have been released from them. — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 667

Categorization

• DEFINE: A compact formal distinction between archaeology (method) and genealogy (tactic) that anchors the entire Foucault toolkit.
• XREF: This method/tactic pairing is the operative framework later critical-theory readings deploy against claims to neutral, expert scientific discourse on Islam. — connects to: Analyzing the present requires tracing its anterior genealogical conditions of existence; Genealogy requires the removal of totalizing discourse’s tyranny — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 27; Genealogy resists the centralizing power-effects of scientific discourse, not scientific knowledge itself — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 28 (+1 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 29; Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 667

Broader Connections

• Recovering subjugated knowledges risks rebuilding a unitary discourse #complicates (0.80)