Foucault points out that during the classical age, the notion of the infinite was both central and primary: thus for Descartes one can prove the existence of God by the presence of the idea of the infinite in the finite. The underlying assumption is that the infinite has ontological pre-eminence over the finite: in accordance with the Aristotelian/Thomist view that an effect cannot be superior to its cause, the only possible conclusion is that the idea of the infinite was placed in us by God. In a reversal of the Greek understanding of the apeiron, during the classical age the finite stands in a relation of ontological subordination to and logical derivation from the infinite. By contrast, for Foucault the hallmark of the anthropological turn is that human finitude, instead of being subordinated to God’s infinity, becomes self-foundational: ‘our culture’, he tells us, ‘crossed the threshold beyond which we recognise our modernity when finitude was conceived in an interminable crossreference with itself. (...) Modern culture can conceive of man because it conceives of the finite on the basis of itself’

The ‘Death of Man’: Foucault and Humanism by Beatrice Han-Pile

A man gets up brusquely as specter on a coffin and falls in the same way.
He gets up a few hours later and then he falls again, and the same thing happens every day; this great coitus with the celestial atmosphere is regulated by the terrestrial rotation around the sun.
Thus even though terrestrial life moves to the rhythm of this rotation, the imagine of this movement is not the turning earth, but the male shaft penetrating the female and almost entirely merging, in order to reenter.
Love and life appear to be separate only because everything on earth is broken apart by vibrations of various amplitudes and durations.
However, there are no vibrations that are not conjugated with a continuous circular movement; in the same way, a locomotive rolling on the surface of the earth is the image of a continuous metamorphosis.
~G. Bataille

thinkers be like