Colin Wight wrote:
> I still don't see how you think this gets him over the fact/value thingy.
> Insofar, as he claims not be be for or against any particualr position but
> merely telling us the ways things are then he is still working under the
> delusion that his values do not intrude into his work. I mean, 'he's not for
> or against any particular form of medicine', give me a break.
Colin
you do have a certain way of provoking responses don't you. Here goes.
Of course Foucault is 'against' certain practices, such as those of
clinical medicine or psychiatry. What Foucault is refraining from is
the assumption that any alternative programme which he might advance
(even if it were to be realised) would very quickly become the basis of
new relations of power which would need to be resisted. And yes of
course Foucault is being driven by certain views about what is
right/wrong, desirable/undesirable, but these are a) largely
unrecoverable from his works, b) irrelevant to the 'effect' which his
analyses might have, which depends on them connecting in some critical
way with the subjectivity of the reader and c) are certainly not
constituted as an alternative set of norms.
To repeat what I have already said. I do not accept the position that
Foucault was 'detached'.
I thought I would be presumptuous and change the subject line.
Best wishes
Murray
=================================
Murray K. Simpson,
Department of Social Work,
Frankland Building,
The University of Dundee,
Dundee DD1 4HN,
United Kingdom.
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/SocialWork/mainpage.htm
tel. 01382 344948
fax. 01382 221512
e.mail m.k.simpson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> I still don't see how you think this gets him over the fact/value thingy.
> Insofar, as he claims not be be for or against any particualr position but
> merely telling us the ways things are then he is still working under the
> delusion that his values do not intrude into his work. I mean, 'he's not for
> or against any particular form of medicine', give me a break.
Colin
you do have a certain way of provoking responses don't you. Here goes.
Of course Foucault is 'against' certain practices, such as those of
clinical medicine or psychiatry. What Foucault is refraining from is
the assumption that any alternative programme which he might advance
(even if it were to be realised) would very quickly become the basis of
new relations of power which would need to be resisted. And yes of
course Foucault is being driven by certain views about what is
right/wrong, desirable/undesirable, but these are a) largely
unrecoverable from his works, b) irrelevant to the 'effect' which his
analyses might have, which depends on them connecting in some critical
way with the subjectivity of the reader and c) are certainly not
constituted as an alternative set of norms.
To repeat what I have already said. I do not accept the position that
Foucault was 'detached'.
I thought I would be presumptuous and change the subject line.
Best wishes
Murray
=================================
Murray K. Simpson,
Department of Social Work,
Frankland Building,
The University of Dundee,
Dundee DD1 4HN,
United Kingdom.
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/SocialWork/mainpage.htm
tel. 01382 344948
fax. 01382 221512
e.mail m.k.simpson@xxxxxxxxxxxx