Re: transgression selection #8

Sorry, to keep flogging what seems to be such a dead horse (I've got nothing
personally against horses) but please enlighten (it's too early to think of
a better word here) me. Isn't the following simply a restatment of the
fact/value divide? I just can't believe that I seem to be the only one
troubled by this.

John Ransom wrote:

>The above seems to be an example of Foucault directly stating his
>intention to suspend ethical considerations for the purpose of analysis.
>In order to understand the relation between transgression and limit, in
>order to understand the *kind* of space it creates, we need to detach it
>from "its questionable association with ethics." So he's not dismissing
>ethics, nor does he think there's never anything questionable about
>transgressions of them. It's just that to figure out what is going on in a
>world where transgressions of a certain kind are no longer legitimated and
>transformed by a transcendent relation to God, ethical issues must be put
>to the side so the relevant material can be concentrated on.
>
>--jsr
>
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----

Colin Wight
Department of International Politics
University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Aberystwyth
SY23 3DA

--------------------------------------------------------




Partial thread listing: