fromm/the genealogy of ethics

I am reposting this since the first one got all messed up with stuff:

>>When Foucault is talking about "choice" or an "aesthetics of existence" in
>>his late work he seems to imply that there is both a subject that can
>>differentiate itself from the circulation of power, or at least harness
>>power to the point of choice.
>now, its been a while since I looked at the late F. but I don;t buy or
understand this proposition here about a subject being "differentiated" from
power circuits by itself. perhaps if you mean authority structures, ok,
yes; but if power relations and networks are what shape the discourses and
practices that constitute subjects/subjectivities through the definition of
the problems /"problematizations" of self then what could you mean by "a
subject differentiates itself from the circulation of power?"
>nowhere in f. that i know of, does foucault ever deny that individuals have
choice or that there are other modes of power than the
microphysical/disciplinary etc.; he does not deny individual choice/action,
but neither does he study/analyze it per se. So, I would say that even in
early and mid foucault, yes, subjects are in posit8ions of choice/choosing,
but those are contained, shaped, regulated beyond the individ.
>>>I ask you, is choice in the late-Foucault a matter of purchasing a new
VCR, television, computer, and the like. Is choice compulsive shopping at
>>strip-malls and television watching? Is this an aesthetics of existence?
>I don't understand your question/issue here. when you ask the question "is
choice in F." it seems that you presuppose that choice has some essential
nature quality; that there is true choice and pseudo-true/authentic choice.
maybe I am wrong but here you read fouucault as somehow close to Fromm by
your reading of F. that is already assuming frommian/enlightenment
propositions about freedom/choice.
>Of course yes there is an aesthetics of stripmalls and shopoping in them.
that you find it distasteful does nothing to make it less of an aesthetic of
existence; its a different cultural universe than that of the ancient greeks
no doubt, but there are problematizations and technologies of self operating
in the malls.
>>And if it's not, what can be cited in foucault's corpus to separate the
>>different kinds of freedom which seem implicit?
>To my understanding there is no classification of different types of
freedom in Foucault. I always thought that his work sought to subvert and
overcome taht kind of thinking or at least analysis of the world. "freedom"
is soio-culturally and historically constituted; change only leads to a
different game/regime of power/truth, no?
>I don't know if you are so much as reducing foucault --- afterall this is a
newsgroup -- as misreading him, of course, according to the way I have read
>yours truly


Partial thread listing: