In an archived draft at the Bibliothèque nationale de France, Foucault describes two questions haunting him since 1963: “Why are we obliged to tell the truth about ourselves? Which truth?” Foucault poses these two questions in 1980 in drafts for his lectures at the University of California, Berkeley, and I see in these two questions two argumentative threads that weave through Foucault's changing History of Sexuality series over his last decade. These two threads correspond to the dimorphism Foucault frames in Part III of Confessions of the Flesh between confessing monks and married men, that correlates with the distinction between “veridiction” and “juridiction” as two forms relating subjectivity and sexuality. To help tease out these threads, I make two recommendations for how to read Confessions of the Flesh in this following review essay: (1) situate Confessions of the Flesh in relation to Foucault's History of Sexuality series which spans his last decade from 1974 to 1984 and (2) untangle two major threads of Confessions of the Flesh in Foucault's treatment of Cassian and Augustine, as progenitors of veridiction and juridiction respectively, which together produce the conditions for modern disciplinary subjects.

中文翻译：

---

《肉身忏悔》的真实性和管辖权

在法国国家图书馆的一份存档草稿中，福柯描述了自 1963 年以来困扰他的两个问题：“为什么我们有义务说出关于我们自己的真相？哪个真相？福柯于 1980 年在加州大学伯克利分校的讲座草稿中提出了这两个问题，我在这两个问题中看到了两条论证线索，它们贯穿了福柯在过去十年中不断变化的性史系列。这两条线索对应于《肉体的忏悔》第三部分中的二态性福柯框架忏悔僧侣和已婚男子之间的区别，与“真实性”和“管辖权”之间的区别相关，这两种形式涉及主观性和性。为了帮助理清这些线索，我在下面的评论文章中就如何阅读《肉体的忏悔》提出了两条建议：（1）将《肉体的忏悔》与福柯的性史系列联系起来，该系列跨越了他从 1974 年到 1984 年的最后十年(2)理清福柯在对待卡西安和奥古斯丁时分别作为真实性和管辖权的鼻祖的“肉身忏悔”的两条主线，它们共同为现代学科主体创造了条件。