In the conclusion of Allan Megills excellent book, 'Prophets of
Extreminty,' he says,
'The most comprehensive charge that can be leveled against them
(Foucault Derrida, Hiedegger & Nietzsche) is that they totaly
overlook or misconstrue the truly pressing realities of human life.
In their idealism, they try to come to grips not with gravity but but
with the spirit of gravity. It can be argued that the point about
such apparent banalities as, 'what about the workers' or 'what about
the starving millions' is that they refer to an underlying social
reality with problems far weightier than the issues that interest
crisis thinkers'
I had been thinking about this for some time before I read Megills
book. I have some friends who are currently working in Rawanda and
the experiances which they have related to me seem to ironise and
trivialise Foucaults and Derrias fictions. It is very difficult to
tell someone who has witnessed the 'reality' of genocide that 'world
itself is nothing other than art', and that 'there is no true world.'
Is Foucault really working at such a superficial level? What is the
scope and context of Foucaults work?
Ken
Extreminty,' he says,
'The most comprehensive charge that can be leveled against them
(Foucault Derrida, Hiedegger & Nietzsche) is that they totaly
overlook or misconstrue the truly pressing realities of human life.
In their idealism, they try to come to grips not with gravity but but
with the spirit of gravity. It can be argued that the point about
such apparent banalities as, 'what about the workers' or 'what about
the starving millions' is that they refer to an underlying social
reality with problems far weightier than the issues that interest
crisis thinkers'
I had been thinking about this for some time before I read Megills
book. I have some friends who are currently working in Rawanda and
the experiances which they have related to me seem to ironise and
trivialise Foucaults and Derrias fictions. It is very difficult to
tell someone who has witnessed the 'reality' of genocide that 'world
itself is nothing other than art', and that 'there is no true world.'
Is Foucault really working at such a superficial level? What is the
scope and context of Foucaults work?
Ken