Thomas,
I hate to keep repeating this, but Foucault basically accepted a positivist
Humean account of causation and hence was forced to deny its applicability
to the social world: due to the fact that the social world being inherently
open and changing and the Humean account is dependent upon the possibility
of closure and regularity (this is a move that legions of hermeneutic
philosophers have been forced to make). As you point out though causality,
much like metaphysics always sneaks in and poststructuralists in IR, such as
Walker and Ashley, do indeed make causal claims, once again though
predicated on the Humean account, which ironically enough isn't even
warranted in the natural world. The whole thing is a philosophical mess,
certainly in the philosophically impoverished world of international
relations scholarship. By the way this reinscription of causal stories is a
paradigmatic example of the performative contradiction which Habermas goes
on about all of the time: the denial of causality whilst at the same time
writing causality. If your interested David Dessler did a great short book
review of Bradley Klein which makes this point really well. Equally, of
course, I'm convinced that some list members will want to defend the view
that Foucault dispenses with causality.
Thanks,
--------------------------------------------------------
"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
--------------------------------------------------------
I hate to keep repeating this, but Foucault basically accepted a positivist
Humean account of causation and hence was forced to deny its applicability
to the social world: due to the fact that the social world being inherently
open and changing and the Humean account is dependent upon the possibility
of closure and regularity (this is a move that legions of hermeneutic
philosophers have been forced to make). As you point out though causality,
much like metaphysics always sneaks in and poststructuralists in IR, such as
Walker and Ashley, do indeed make causal claims, once again though
predicated on the Humean account, which ironically enough isn't even
warranted in the natural world. The whole thing is a philosophical mess,
certainly in the philosophically impoverished world of international
relations scholarship. By the way this reinscription of causal stories is a
paradigmatic example of the performative contradiction which Habermas goes
on about all of the time: the denial of causality whilst at the same time
writing causality. If your interested David Dessler did a great short book
review of Bradley Klein which makes this point really well. Equally, of
course, I'm convinced that some list members will want to defend the view
that Foucault dispenses with causality.
Thanks,
--------------------------------------------------------
"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
--------------------------------------------------------