RE: MacKinnon and Foucault

Rob writes:
> I fully agree with Jacqueline. And this is also Rorty's critique of
> Foucault: that if power is everywhere, it loses its distinguishing edge
> and becomes vacuous. It seems to me to be extremely important to always
> add the following to Foucault's reading of power: that while knowledge
> and power are co-extensive, and while power displays itself in every act
> of cognition, it is enormously important to attend to the specifics of
> how this power is enacted, the way in which it takes shape, how specific
> objects, identities, texts, persons are codified, normalized, organized
> and monitored. It's not that power exists "behind" or "in back of" these
> processes; rather, these processes _are_ power, and the way in which this
> occurs is remarkably specific, concrete, local.

I'm new to the Foucault list and finding it interesting so far (though all
those receipt messages were odd). I wonder if someone might say the source
of Rorty's critique and the best source of the description of Foucault's
idea of power that Rob very clearly describes above. If you'd like, you can
send it directly to me. Thanks!

Dave Leight


Partial thread listing: