Godzich again, explaining that Foucault remained immured in the very hegemonic discourse that he assaulted: “Foucault conceived of himself as the surveyor of these very hegemonic modes of cognition, as someone who would describe their systematicity and their hold.  Though he labeled the enterprise an archaeology, he paid scant attention to the ways in which these hegemonic modes of cognition did establish themselves and to the means by which they managed to maintain their grasp.  In fact, his own concern with the hegemonic forced him to discard with a ruthlessness equal to that of what he was describing any practices, discursive or otherwise, that sought to maintain any autonomy with respect to these hegemonic behemoths.”  Hence his “inability to articulate the movement, or the shift, from one hegemonic mode of cognition to another.”