Eric writes:
>So, may I stipulate that his point was: the subject will
>always have things internalized and inscribed upon it.
>It doesn't matter what we do. THis is the state of power
>relationships. THe idea is to become highly critical in
>order to see this as a constant thing which must be
>kept in mind at all times. But then, this is where I
>start to think of Foucault as believing that objectivity
>is the answer, and that he is kind of a reformulation
>of certain Hegelian concepts about freedom.
I am uncertain as to how you mean "objectivity is the answer". But your
mentioning Hegel is curious because I've noticed possible connections
between Foucault's notion of a continuous "reactivation of a critical
attitude" and Hegel's dialectic (of course, without the Absolute or Hegel's
own story of the phases of the Phenomenology of Spirit as necessary.) This
suspicion becomes more interesting I think, in light Foucault's ambiguous
comments about Hegel in The Discourse on Language where he admits:
"But truly to escape Hegel involves an exact appreciation of the price we
have to pay to detach ourselves from him.... We have to determine the
extent to which our anti-Hegelianism is possibly one of his tricks directed
against us, at the end of which he stands, motionless, waiting for us."
(AK, p.235)
>A last note here. Sean, I responded to another post of
>yours while having forgotten this exchange. Therefore,
>it may seem in this other post like I am repeating myself,
>or even disagreeing. But I am just looking towards
>clarification of my reading of what you said, and I guess,
>restating much of what was already said in the post
>you are responding to here. ....I guess what we are
>actually doing here is honing in on what we think about
>Foucault. Which is highly helpful!
>
>Cheers! and MERRY CHRISTMAS!
>
I find myself doing the same thing.
Merry Christmas!
Sean
>So, may I stipulate that his point was: the subject will
>always have things internalized and inscribed upon it.
>It doesn't matter what we do. THis is the state of power
>relationships. THe idea is to become highly critical in
>order to see this as a constant thing which must be
>kept in mind at all times. But then, this is where I
>start to think of Foucault as believing that objectivity
>is the answer, and that he is kind of a reformulation
>of certain Hegelian concepts about freedom.
I am uncertain as to how you mean "objectivity is the answer". But your
mentioning Hegel is curious because I've noticed possible connections
between Foucault's notion of a continuous "reactivation of a critical
attitude" and Hegel's dialectic (of course, without the Absolute or Hegel's
own story of the phases of the Phenomenology of Spirit as necessary.) This
suspicion becomes more interesting I think, in light Foucault's ambiguous
comments about Hegel in The Discourse on Language where he admits:
"But truly to escape Hegel involves an exact appreciation of the price we
have to pay to detach ourselves from him.... We have to determine the
extent to which our anti-Hegelianism is possibly one of his tricks directed
against us, at the end of which he stands, motionless, waiting for us."
(AK, p.235)
>A last note here. Sean, I responded to another post of
>yours while having forgotten this exchange. Therefore,
>it may seem in this other post like I am repeating myself,
>or even disagreeing. But I am just looking towards
>clarification of my reading of what you said, and I guess,
>restating much of what was already said in the post
>you are responding to here. ....I guess what we are
>actually doing here is honing in on what we think about
>Foucault. Which is highly helpful!
>
>Cheers! and MERRY CHRISTMAS!
>
I find myself doing the same thing.
Merry Christmas!
Sean