I agree, completely with Jeff, however, it might be better to substitute the
use of the phrase 'reality principle' with 'acuality principle'. Because
>from where I stand the capitalist system is actually here but its claim to
be the one true reality, the only way that is, is what needs to be
questioned. Nicholas' position seems to be a perfect example of what Bhaskar
calls a TINA ('There is no alternative'). The confusion of actuality with
reality. (don't come back to me please on this, please, I know, 'there is no
reality', independent of our (dis)courses, yeah, yeah, yeah!)
>>
>
>What are informal inequalities? What do you mean by "prosperous"? Why
>would any society want to be prosperosu except under the sawy of the
>reality principle? If being propserous requires unjust inequalities-formal
>or not- then should we strive to be prosperous? In any case, I dny your
>whole claim. I think that a society can be prosperous, if you mean by this
>maintain a level of standard of living above the bare necessities, without
>the "persuasion" of profit- or what it boils down to, the lies of the
>reality principle.
--------------------------------------------------------
"What I try to achieve is the history of the relations which
thought maintains with truth; the history of thought insofar as it is the
thought of truth. All those who say truth does not exist for me are
simple minded."
(Foucault)
Colin Wight
Department of International Politics
University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Aberystwyth
SY23 3DA
--------------------------------------------------------
use of the phrase 'reality principle' with 'acuality principle'. Because
>from where I stand the capitalist system is actually here but its claim to
be the one true reality, the only way that is, is what needs to be
questioned. Nicholas' position seems to be a perfect example of what Bhaskar
calls a TINA ('There is no alternative'). The confusion of actuality with
reality. (don't come back to me please on this, please, I know, 'there is no
reality', independent of our (dis)courses, yeah, yeah, yeah!)
>>
>
>What are informal inequalities? What do you mean by "prosperous"? Why
>would any society want to be prosperosu except under the sawy of the
>reality principle? If being propserous requires unjust inequalities-formal
>or not- then should we strive to be prosperous? In any case, I dny your
>whole claim. I think that a society can be prosperous, if you mean by this
>maintain a level of standard of living above the bare necessities, without
>the "persuasion" of profit- or what it boils down to, the lies of the
>reality principle.
--------------------------------------------------------
"What I try to achieve is the history of the relations which
thought maintains with truth; the history of thought insofar as it is the
thought of truth. All those who say truth does not exist for me are
simple minded."
(Foucault)
Colin Wight
Department of International Politics
University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Aberystwyth
SY23 3DA
--------------------------------------------------------