Phil S writes:
> Briefly, Heidegger long ago named the unifying feature of the 20th
>century world "Gestell" which means the technological enframing of reality in
>which all things (now including humans in that category) are allowed to
>presence (be seen) in only one way, as stock or standing reserve. So all
>things are resources serving the will to will of western man.
> Does this explain the rapid rise to prominence of technological
>(biological) psychiatry? You bet it does. 100%
Sorry if this is inappropriate for the Foucault list but.....
If your reporting of Heidegger's 'explanation' is accurate Phil, he makes
it sound natural and inevitable, and in that sense 'right'. If this is the
case, how or why would anyone attempt to subvert it ("the will to will of
western man")?
In any case, I don't buy monocular, all-explanatory, all-sufficient easily
expressed causes for complex human events. If you want an explanation for
the rise of biological psychiatry, the first place to look is at the
profits of the drug companies and the need for psychiatrists to maintain
their own status! Then look at the politics of the alternatives. I think
that is more likely to yield a persuasive account than any Heideggerian
'formula'.
Colin Holmes
> Briefly, Heidegger long ago named the unifying feature of the 20th
>century world "Gestell" which means the technological enframing of reality in
>which all things (now including humans in that category) are allowed to
>presence (be seen) in only one way, as stock or standing reserve. So all
>things are resources serving the will to will of western man.
> Does this explain the rapid rise to prominence of technological
>(biological) psychiatry? You bet it does. 100%
Sorry if this is inappropriate for the Foucault list but.....
If your reporting of Heidegger's 'explanation' is accurate Phil, he makes
it sound natural and inevitable, and in that sense 'right'. If this is the
case, how or why would anyone attempt to subvert it ("the will to will of
western man")?
In any case, I don't buy monocular, all-explanatory, all-sufficient easily
expressed causes for complex human events. If you want an explanation for
the rise of biological psychiatry, the first place to look is at the
profits of the drug companies and the need for psychiatrists to maintain
their own status! Then look at the politics of the alternatives. I think
that is more likely to yield a persuasive account than any Heideggerian
'formula'.
Colin Holmes