▁st ance ▁which ▁crit iques ▁norm ativity ▁as ▁soci ally ▁constructed ▁and ▁cont ing ent , ▁but ▁which ▁re lies ▁on ▁an ▁implicit ▁norm ▁in ▁order ▁to ▁mount ▁the ▁critique ▁led ▁phil os opher ▁J ürgen ▁Hab erm as ▁to ▁describe ▁Fou ca ult ' s ▁thinking ▁as ▁ ▁" c rypto - norm ativ ist ", ▁cover t ly ▁reli ant ▁on ▁the ▁very ▁En light en ment ▁principles ▁he ▁attempts ▁to ▁argue ▁against . ▁A ▁similar ▁critique ▁has ▁been ▁advanced ▁by ▁D iana ▁Taylor , ▁and ▁by ▁Nancy ▁F ras er ▁who ▁arg ues ▁that ▁" F ou ca ult ' s ▁critique ▁en comp ass es ▁traditional ▁moral ▁systems , ▁he ▁den ies ▁himself ▁rec ourse ▁to ▁concepts ▁such ▁as ▁' fre edom ' ▁and ▁' just ice ', ▁and ▁therefore ▁la cks ▁the ▁ability ▁to ▁generate ▁positive ▁alternatives ." ▁Like wise , ▁scholar ▁Nancy ▁Pear ce y ▁points ▁out ▁Fou ca ult ' s ▁par ado x ical ▁st ance : ▁"[ when ▁someone ] ▁states ▁that ▁it ▁is ▁impossible ▁to ▁att ain ▁object ivity , ▁is ▁that ▁an ▁objective ▁statement ? ▁The ▁theory ▁under cut s ▁its ▁own ▁claims ." ▁ ▁Gene al ogy ▁as ▁historical ▁method ▁The ▁phil os opher ▁Richard ▁R ort y ▁has ▁argued ▁that ▁Fou ca ult ' s ▁" arch ae ology ▁of ▁knowledge " ▁is ▁fund ament ally ▁negative , ▁and ▁thus ▁fails ▁to ▁ade qu ately ▁establish ▁any ▁" new " ▁theory ▁of ▁knowledge ▁per ▁se . ▁R ather , ▁Fou