Murray K. Simpson wrote:
>I find this kind of criticism of Foucault to be a bit bizarre since the
>differentiation of techniques of power, the insistence on the necessity
>of describing the exercise of power as it actually occurs and the denial
>of the usefulness or possibility of a general concept of power is
>precisely what Foucault is all about.
Certainly this is true, but what mystifies me is precisely what this thing
called "power" is. The details of its operations are explored at length,
but who its beneficiaries are and what motivates them - these are often
elusive. Can anyone enlighten me on this?
Doug
>I find this kind of criticism of Foucault to be a bit bizarre since the
>differentiation of techniques of power, the insistence on the necessity
>of describing the exercise of power as it actually occurs and the denial
>of the usefulness or possibility of a general concept of power is
>precisely what Foucault is all about.
Certainly this is true, but what mystifies me is precisely what this thing
called "power" is. The details of its operations are explored at length,
but who its beneficiaries are and what motivates them - these are often
elusive. Can anyone enlighten me on this?
Doug