>Jeff writes:
>"I think we have to have some real or true aspect of ourselves which power
>subverts in order for their to be any punch, meaning or use to the notion
>of power."
>
>At this point I am not prepared to respond to this claim directly, but I would
>like to suggest that taking this position amounts to much more than a
>modification of Foucault's arguments (or even a rejection of some of his
claims
>coupled with an acceptance of others). To assume that there must exist some
>true aspect of ourselves that power subverts is to completely diverge with
>Foucualt's claims with respect to discourse, power, and sexuality.
Well since F states, everybody knows where so i won't prvide a ref, that he
is primarily interested in the way 'human beings are made subjects' then
might it not be that he is referring to an inner essence prior to
construction - a human being no less. Moreover, F's attempt to distance
himself from the so-called liberal conception of power is; (i) questionable,
I would argue that F has is own hidden 'repressive hypothesis; (ii) if he
did, what on earth are all the Foucaultites doing? Why is anyone bothering,
what is the subject that your all so concerned with? What is it you all so
passionately care about? There is no point in saying this should be
otherwise, let's just leave everything as it is. A lack of a normative
standpoint, even more virulent than that denied by positivism
Been there done it, got the tee-shirt. Boring.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
*******************************************************************
"We stand at the end of the age of reason.
A new era of the magical explanation of the world is rising.
(Adolf Hitler)
*******************************************************************
Colin Wight
Department of International Politics
University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Aberystwyth
SY23 3DA
--------------------------------------------------------
>"I think we have to have some real or true aspect of ourselves which power
>subverts in order for their to be any punch, meaning or use to the notion
>of power."
>
>At this point I am not prepared to respond to this claim directly, but I would
>like to suggest that taking this position amounts to much more than a
>modification of Foucault's arguments (or even a rejection of some of his
claims
>coupled with an acceptance of others). To assume that there must exist some
>true aspect of ourselves that power subverts is to completely diverge with
>Foucualt's claims with respect to discourse, power, and sexuality.
Well since F states, everybody knows where so i won't prvide a ref, that he
is primarily interested in the way 'human beings are made subjects' then
might it not be that he is referring to an inner essence prior to
construction - a human being no less. Moreover, F's attempt to distance
himself from the so-called liberal conception of power is; (i) questionable,
I would argue that F has is own hidden 'repressive hypothesis; (ii) if he
did, what on earth are all the Foucaultites doing? Why is anyone bothering,
what is the subject that your all so concerned with? What is it you all so
passionately care about? There is no point in saying this should be
otherwise, let's just leave everything as it is. A lack of a normative
standpoint, even more virulent than that denied by positivism
Been there done it, got the tee-shirt. Boring.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
*******************************************************************
"We stand at the end of the age of reason.
A new era of the magical explanation of the world is rising.
(Adolf Hitler)
*******************************************************************
Colin Wight
Department of International Politics
University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Aberystwyth
SY23 3DA
--------------------------------------------------------