Re: What is Power?

This is interesting and helpful except for one thing - I don't get how there
can be intentions without subjects. What are "imbedded" intentions? To
whom or what are they attributed? Perhaps my confusion is stemming from
a cultural obsession with a cohesive, bound self, whereas to Foucault, the
self isn't a heuristic concept in this case, and intentions are as diffuse
and elusive as power...?

-Karen Kolodenko

On Tue, 1 Aug 1995 CCOLWELL@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Re: Power as intentional and non-subjective, see History of Sexuality, I
> pp 92-6
> Power is intentional to the extent that there are intentions imbedded
> in power relations, e.g.,heterosexual or patriarchal intentions imbedded
> in most if not all institutions in this country. It is non-subjective tot
> the extent that there is no subject to which origin or responsibility
> can be assigned for these intentions. The effects of our 'actions'
> (conceived as broadly as possible) not only escape or intentions but
> generate effects of power to which we can ascribe, or simply perceive,
> intentions. Indeed, if F coherently argues that subjects are the effects
> of power/knowledge relations then power relations must be non-subjective.


Partial thread listing: