Re: fromm/the genealogy of ethics

>Yes, what I am saying is that Foucault is idealizing a certain kind of
>choice. Please explain to me further your Foucauldian "aesthetics of

I believe that to idealize is different than to conceptualize as a
transcendental entity. so, i would agree yes, there seems to be a kind of
idealization by Foucault regarding the self -- its the last focus of his
life work and it then becomes in that aggrandizing mode of theory the
best/only issue of merit. And that idealization only snowballs with the
various interviews that further promote the topic and its author. (my how
media functions) but another issue entirely is the question of his
conceptualizing the category of choice as a content that transcends
sociohistorical situations. I am not convinced, but then I am not well read
on this later stuff. It does not seem congruent with his thought and then
with my theoretical positioning: choice/freedom/individuality and
individualism are not transcendental entities. So, my response would be
that lets, in good ole decerteauian fashion, make do with whats useful and
leave the rest aside. for me it becomes a question of practice, of how this
helps me in the practice of analyzing sociocultural forms. so what then
will be the point to discover this transcendental dimension if indeed it is
there as you posit? are we to discard foucault now for fromm? i am
seriously asking what/ how will this understanding affect your analyses?

as for foucaultian take on the aesthetics of shopping (in) malls: its not
all that interesting subject matter for me; but i can imagine that one could
inspect the problematizations of self that articulate with shopping
practices -- consumerism and materialism -- easily enough. and many have
done so, no? let me change your question: how would "a" foucault redo
benjamin on strolling/shopping? or what are the theories of self that
inhere in the logics, practices and policies of advertizing?


Partial thread listing: