>In the animal kingdom, the rule is eat or be
>eaten. In the human world, the rule is define or be defined. Power is
>the power to define, to make knowledge a dispersion of what goes
>without saying from ones' own perspective and, at the same time, a
>commentary defining the alterity of the other as delusion and deviance.
> Any Comments,
> Tony Michael Roberts
"Define or be defined" is true enough, but isn't it more a question of
"define and be defined"? Of course, in defining the "other" we define
"ourselves", but can we really define "ourselves" without defining an
"other"? Can we live by "our" own "self-definition" with out it
implying statements about others which may or may not be true? Can any
"we" statement escape this implication? Are "I think" statements
entirely free of "other-defining" implications?
I'd have to say that the last is possible, that we can all talk about
our own immediate perceptions without imposing, impinging, or defining
others, but I'm interested in the implications of what you are saying.
It's precisely that "eat or be eaten, define or be defined" that
interests me. There is a religion in India (is it the Jains?) that
takes extreme caution lest microbes inadvertently be destroyed by being
eaten, inhaled or trodden upon. As with "eat or be eaten", I have to
wonder how radically we are to take "define or be defined". So I have
to ask if we can truly define ourselves with out defining others.
One thing that interests me about your post (I know nothing about
Foucault, but I'm trying to stay intellectually active), is the
possibility (and impossibility) of a "metalanguage" of overarching
statements. To say, "I dislike X, because I view it against the
background of W, Y and Z," leaving open the possibility that you may
love X, because in your experience it is juxtaposed with or seen against
the horizon of A, B, and C, may be a way of making sense of the world
and minimizing disagreements (assuming that we think it important to do
so). But if life is a struggle of "eat or be eaten, define or be
defined" does one want to achieve such an "overarching
metaperspective"
Michael Smith
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com