Hi Dan,
your project regarding:
>foucault\'s archaelogical/genealogical approach to map
> how the subject position
> \"scholar/academic\" was/is constituted in the discipline of
> rhetorical studies, as well as to articulate what modes
> of discipline and discursive practice were/are linked to this subject
> position.
sounds like it has some common grounds with my work - have you published a paper
on this or is it on the web somewhere? I would love to read it
You say
> i may be able to offer you some advice. however, i need you to
> clarify a few things for me to help me have a better
> understanding of your project.
> first, what do mean when you say:
>
> >preeminence of social morphology over social action\\\" (Castells, 96),
This is a quote from Manuel Castells, in which he is talking about the shape of
society, its morphology, which is networked (nodes etc). This shape has more
importance for our understanding of social change than social action has
> second, could you clarify this (esp. what you mean by
> subjectivity of the institution):>
> >...attempting to understand the subjectivity of the
> >institution, the self conscious perspective of the subject, the
> institution of
> >the university.
the subjectivity is the way the subject (the university) understands itself, how
it presents itself to the world, for example the \"idea of the university\" is a
way of presenting the university to society as an institution with a certion
purpose
> and finally, below, what is meant by centrality of subjectivity?
>
> > ...how do we understand the centrality of subjectivity to the
> organisation of
> >social and political relations?
The centrality of the subjectivity I am still working on, I mean that the
subject has its own world view, with itself as central to the social and
political relations it holds
(I feel like I have just been through a socratic dialogue)
Regards
Diane Westerhuis
-----------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://web.horde.org/imp/
your project regarding:
>foucault\'s archaelogical/genealogical approach to map
> how the subject position
> \"scholar/academic\" was/is constituted in the discipline of
> rhetorical studies, as well as to articulate what modes
> of discipline and discursive practice were/are linked to this subject
> position.
sounds like it has some common grounds with my work - have you published a paper
on this or is it on the web somewhere? I would love to read it
You say
> i may be able to offer you some advice. however, i need you to
> clarify a few things for me to help me have a better
> understanding of your project.
> first, what do mean when you say:
>
> >preeminence of social morphology over social action\\\" (Castells, 96),
This is a quote from Manuel Castells, in which he is talking about the shape of
society, its morphology, which is networked (nodes etc). This shape has more
importance for our understanding of social change than social action has
> second, could you clarify this (esp. what you mean by
> subjectivity of the institution):>
> >...attempting to understand the subjectivity of the
> >institution, the self conscious perspective of the subject, the
> institution of
> >the university.
the subjectivity is the way the subject (the university) understands itself, how
it presents itself to the world, for example the \"idea of the university\" is a
way of presenting the university to society as an institution with a certion
purpose
> and finally, below, what is meant by centrality of subjectivity?
>
> > ...how do we understand the centrality of subjectivity to the
> organisation of
> >social and political relations?
The centrality of the subjectivity I am still working on, I mean that the
subject has its own world view, with itself as central to the social and
political relations it holds
(I feel like I have just been through a socratic dialogue)
Regards
Diane Westerhuis
-----------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://web.horde.org/imp/