At 09:10 14/05/96 +0100, you wrote:
>If this is a correct reading of Foucault's notion of discourse and
>poststructuralism in general. Then it is clearly an idealism of some kind:
>conceptual, linguistic, who knows? But to construe it as simply an
>epistmological position fails to see how epistemology is secreting an
>ontology based on human experience and/or practice. It's anthropocentic.
>Count me out.
>
>Colin Wight
>Department of International Politics
>University of Wales, Aberystwyth
>Aberystwyth
>SY23 3DA
>
Interesting. I'm wondering Colin if you are drawing on something like
actor-network theory (Bruno Latour's work)in your problems with the
anthropocentric leanings of this summary?
John Banks
J.Banks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>If this is a correct reading of Foucault's notion of discourse and
>poststructuralism in general. Then it is clearly an idealism of some kind:
>conceptual, linguistic, who knows? But to construe it as simply an
>epistmological position fails to see how epistemology is secreting an
>ontology based on human experience and/or practice. It's anthropocentic.
>Count me out.
>
>Colin Wight
>Department of International Politics
>University of Wales, Aberystwyth
>Aberystwyth
>SY23 3DA
>
Interesting. I'm wondering Colin if you are drawing on something like
actor-network theory (Bruno Latour's work)in your problems with the
anthropocentric leanings of this summary?
John Banks
J.Banks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx