Foucault or Groot?

It can be hard to differentiate between them.

One is a great thinker of our age: someone who has contributed to the depth and breadth of human understanding and intellect. The other is Michel Foucault.

They even look alike. Here’s Foucault:

And here’s Groot.

But can you distinguish between their philosophical approaches?

Here they speak on art:

What strikes me is the fact that in our society, art has become something which is related only to objects and not to individuals, or to life. That art is something which is specialized or which is done by experts who are artists. But couldn’t everyone’s life become a work of art? Why should the lamp or the house be an art object, but not our life?

versus

I am Groot.

Here on the genesis of ideas:

We have to be there at the birth of ideas, the bursting outward of their force: not in books expressing them, but in events manifesting this force, in struggles carried on around ideas, for or against them.

versus

I am Groot.

On authorship:

One can say that the author is an ideological product, since we represent him as the opposite of his historically real function. (When a historically given function is represented in a figure that inverts it, one has an ideological production.) The author is therefore the ideological figure by which one marks the manner in which we fear the proliferation of meaning.

versus

I am Groot.

On labour:

Since the Fall, man had accepted labor as a penance and for its power to work redemption. It was not a law of nature which forced man to work, but the effect of a curse.

versus

I am Groot.

And finally, on God:

You may have killed God beneath the weight of all that you have said; but don’t imagine that, with all that you are saying, you will make a man that will live longer than he.

versus

I am Groot.

See? Nearly indistinguishable. For starters, I didn’t ever realize Foucault knew Rocket and Starlord. I’d love to hear your best guesses on who-said-what; join me in the comments to discuss.