Foucault, post-modern? What is postmodernism to begin with? Secondly, in
1984, F. was stuck with the baudelairian idea of dandy(ism)"!!!
Is this enough provocation?
Atefeh
At , foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>At 04:18 PM 10/20/96 -0500, Omar Nasim wrote:
>>On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, Stephen D'Arcy wrote:
>>
>>> Discussion on this list has to be provoked. There is a simple
>>> technique. You begin with a controversial claim, like "Foucault is a
>>> Marxist," or "Foucault is a conservative," or "Foucault is a liberal."
>>> Then you supply an argument, or a quotation, to justify your claim.
>>> And then you encourage people who disagree to try to convince you that
>>> you are mistaken.
>>
>>
>>Thankyou for your adivice, but you forgot another aspect of
>>dialoge, agreement. What i am about to do with your next paragraph, i.e.
>>agree with it.
>>
>>> Speaking of controversial interpretations of Foucault: I think
>>> Foucault is so far from being a "post-modernist" that he has much more
>>> in common with Immanuel Kant than he does with, say, Lyotard or
>>> Derrida (not that I would admit that Derrida is a postmodernist).
>>>
>>> I don't have time to justify this, but perhaps those who have read
>>> Foucault's "What is Enlightenment?," or, say, Ian Hacking's
>>> "Self-improvement" (in FOUCAULT: A CRITICAL READER), can anticipate
>>> the sort of justification I would give.
>>>
>>> I'm really curious: what is it about Foucault that makes him something
>>> other than a characteristically "modern" thinker?
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>>I would tend to agree with your asseration, that Foucault is more Kantian
>>than lyotardean or derridean. I read "What is Englightment", and your
>>right, Foucault's position seems to me, that of a Kantian postion, in
>>that he is a strong exponent of aesthetics and progressive change through
>>art, where, he believes, is the only way to trascend the power/knowledge
>>schemes, he's soo fond of. That is, instead of being anti-aesthetical, a
>>post-modern position, he asserts the neccessity of aesthetics, just as
>>Kant did. Being aesthetical as opposed to Anti-aesthetical, I feel that
>>Foucault still beliefs in the good ole values of judgement, and therefore
>>Truth, With MEANING!!! therefore, depth.
>>Omar Nasim
>>Department of Philosophy,
>>University of Manitoba
>>
>>
>>
Az Khak Bar'amadim-o- Bar Khak Shodym
1984, F. was stuck with the baudelairian idea of dandy(ism)"!!!
Is this enough provocation?
Atefeh
At , foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>At 04:18 PM 10/20/96 -0500, Omar Nasim wrote:
>>On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, Stephen D'Arcy wrote:
>>
>>> Discussion on this list has to be provoked. There is a simple
>>> technique. You begin with a controversial claim, like "Foucault is a
>>> Marxist," or "Foucault is a conservative," or "Foucault is a liberal."
>>> Then you supply an argument, or a quotation, to justify your claim.
>>> And then you encourage people who disagree to try to convince you that
>>> you are mistaken.
>>
>>
>>Thankyou for your adivice, but you forgot another aspect of
>>dialoge, agreement. What i am about to do with your next paragraph, i.e.
>>agree with it.
>>
>>> Speaking of controversial interpretations of Foucault: I think
>>> Foucault is so far from being a "post-modernist" that he has much more
>>> in common with Immanuel Kant than he does with, say, Lyotard or
>>> Derrida (not that I would admit that Derrida is a postmodernist).
>>>
>>> I don't have time to justify this, but perhaps those who have read
>>> Foucault's "What is Enlightenment?," or, say, Ian Hacking's
>>> "Self-improvement" (in FOUCAULT: A CRITICAL READER), can anticipate
>>> the sort of justification I would give.
>>>
>>> I'm really curious: what is it about Foucault that makes him something
>>> other than a characteristically "modern" thinker?
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>>I would tend to agree with your asseration, that Foucault is more Kantian
>>than lyotardean or derridean. I read "What is Englightment", and your
>>right, Foucault's position seems to me, that of a Kantian postion, in
>>that he is a strong exponent of aesthetics and progressive change through
>>art, where, he believes, is the only way to trascend the power/knowledge
>>schemes, he's soo fond of. That is, instead of being anti-aesthetical, a
>>post-modern position, he asserts the neccessity of aesthetics, just as
>>Kant did. Being aesthetical as opposed to Anti-aesthetical, I feel that
>>Foucault still beliefs in the good ole values of judgement, and therefore
>>Truth, With MEANING!!! therefore, depth.
>>Omar Nasim
>>Department of Philosophy,
>>University of Manitoba
>>
>>
>>
Az Khak Bar'amadim-o- Bar Khak Shodym