Re: deconstruction v. genealogy

>Habermas describes 'effective history' (which i equate with the concept
>of 'genealogy' in Foucault - pls correct me if you see a difference here)
>as a process wherein "The horizon [is] open to ... [a] future, which is
>determined by expectations in the present, [and which] guides our access to
>the past". This would seem to me to be a process which would possibly
>include 'deconstruction', but is not to be equated with it.

Habermas and Foucault have such different presuppositions, that despite
terminiology such as "effective history," I find it hard to believe they
share identical positions. Habermas is in search of some neutral space,
beyond power, to ground a communicative praxis. Foucault, meanwhile, is
trying to transcend in a world without transcdendents. Power is everywhere.
Clearly, Focualt is a philosopher of difference and part of the genealogical
mission is to look for disparity, but Foucault does not get bogged down in
simply indentifying and unmasking binary oppositions or searching for
Neitzsche's umbrella (Derrida). The big picture -- the intersection of
power, ideology, and institutions -- remains the Foucauldian enterprise.


Partial thread listing: