>In a message dated 97-09-30 05:10:23 EDT, you write:
>
><< Also you say that Foucault claims that I's should shift their focus from a
> battle on behalf of truth to one that questions the status of truth and the
> economic and political role it play. However, it hardly needs pointing out
> that in order to do the latter one must know what T is. Hence I don't see
> how the two questions can be separated. >>
>
>Sure you can! It is all about questioning assumptions and power. You can
>replace the word "truth" in the above paragraph, with "science," for example.
> We can all agree that there are multiple truths in existence, can we not?
>
>Because, when considering scientific verus scienitistic pursuits, one
>explores the idea of science as A mode of inquiry. This assumes that science
>paradigm (perhaps something positivistic) is leaving something out, like
>other truths or what have you. This is a Foucauld-influenced feminist's
>playground, no? So, while science may be (comparatively, now) A truth, it
>is not THE truth. Power, again, right?!
All truths, all paradigms, all ideologies leave something out, of course;
isn't that what deconstruction - influenced by Foucault - has taught us to
be aware of? But what was/is the next step? For a while a lot of important
feminist and race theory made important criticisms and proposed alternate
paradigms and truths toward which we might build. Have they been realized?
To what degree? How have this alternative truths become generally accepted
truths and incorporated into institutions and dominating discourses?
What I think Foucault has left us are tools for understanding, analyzing and
critiquing but has he left us tools for articulating and implementing a
better world? My priorities are A - how do create a world that resembles A?
What ways might we "use" Foucault's (and other theorists') analysis of
social power ultimately to create (not just criticized; or first crticize,
then create). When I think about a lot of classic theory, it was about
imagining new, better socities; modern theory is more critical, less
constructive; and postmodern theory (it seems to me) is extremely critical
and not that much at all constructive.
Forgive this tangential response, but perhaps some of you may draw from your
vast storehouse of knowledge and use your lucid thinking to find some
answers to my questions.
I appreciate your help,
Alex
>I hope this post came out alright. I read a heck of a lot more than I
>speak/write, especially in this area.
>Thanks, K
>
>
>
>
>
><< Also you say that Foucault claims that I's should shift their focus from a
> battle on behalf of truth to one that questions the status of truth and the
> economic and political role it play. However, it hardly needs pointing out
> that in order to do the latter one must know what T is. Hence I don't see
> how the two questions can be separated. >>
>
>Sure you can! It is all about questioning assumptions and power. You can
>replace the word "truth" in the above paragraph, with "science," for example.
> We can all agree that there are multiple truths in existence, can we not?
>
>Because, when considering scientific verus scienitistic pursuits, one
>explores the idea of science as A mode of inquiry. This assumes that science
>paradigm (perhaps something positivistic) is leaving something out, like
>other truths or what have you. This is a Foucauld-influenced feminist's
>playground, no? So, while science may be (comparatively, now) A truth, it
>is not THE truth. Power, again, right?!
All truths, all paradigms, all ideologies leave something out, of course;
isn't that what deconstruction - influenced by Foucault - has taught us to
be aware of? But what was/is the next step? For a while a lot of important
feminist and race theory made important criticisms and proposed alternate
paradigms and truths toward which we might build. Have they been realized?
To what degree? How have this alternative truths become generally accepted
truths and incorporated into institutions and dominating discourses?
What I think Foucault has left us are tools for understanding, analyzing and
critiquing but has he left us tools for articulating and implementing a
better world? My priorities are A - how do create a world that resembles A?
What ways might we "use" Foucault's (and other theorists') analysis of
social power ultimately to create (not just criticized; or first crticize,
then create). When I think about a lot of classic theory, it was about
imagining new, better socities; modern theory is more critical, less
constructive; and postmodern theory (it seems to me) is extremely critical
and not that much at all constructive.
Forgive this tangential response, but perhaps some of you may draw from your
vast storehouse of knowledge and use your lucid thinking to find some
answers to my questions.
I appreciate your help,
Alex
>I hope this post came out alright. I read a heck of a lot more than I
>speak/write, especially in this area.
>Thanks, K
>
>
>
>