Re: undergrad texts

rob L wrote:

>I think that the _Archaeology_ is Foucault's unsuccessful attempt to codify
>what he was doing. It is vague on some of the most important
>theoretical/methodological issues of his work, e.g. the definition of the
>"statement". He says what it is not, but never exactly what it is.
>_Discipline and Punish_ and _The Order of Things_ are better. Also, for
>undergrads, the elusive but interesting essay "What is Enlightenment?" and
>some of the essays contained in the volume _Power/Knowledge_.

i personally rather like AK especially the way it slips the statement between
empiricism and rationalims...between skinner and chomsky? arriving at a place
that smells like wittgenstein's kitchen....or austin's pantry....but "never
exactly what it is" reminds me of derrida's critique of austin...and suddenly
i wonder if you could run a derridean critique of Ak along similar
lines.......which sounds like a novel way to bring these two
together....without recycling some form of their descartes and madness
debate.....has anybody started putting that soup together?


Partial thread listing: