John--
Foucault's genealogies aren't going to tell you what
to think (what you *ought* to think) with respect to
displine, punishment, or sexuality. In the tradition
of Nietzsche, Foucault is a truth teller. As such,
his "historical" characterizations merely tell us what
has been and what might be right now, not what we
ought to do with it. As Foucault puts it in a 1983
interview "I would like to do a genealogy of problems,
of preblematiques. My point is not that everything is
bad, but that everything is *dangerous*, which is not
exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous,
then we always have something to do. So my position
leads not to apathy but to a hyper- and pessimistic
activism" (from Rabinow and Dreyfus, 1983). It's up
to us to make the dangerous decision of what
punishment ought to be, or whether it ought to be at
all.
Paul Bryant
Department of Philosophy
Loyola University of Chicago
--- MANOUSSJ <MANOUSSJ@xxxxxx> wrote:
> I only recently began reading Foucault and I while
> I am imediately taken by
> his gripping imagery and his striking comparisons I
> am having difficulty
> sifting out exactly what is HIS own opinion as
> distinct from the historical
> analysis of that which he is describing. If anyone
> could help point me to
> passages in "Discipline and Punish" which would
> indicate Foucault's own and
> original thought about "punishment".. its
> justification and its origins I
> would be very thankful.
>
> thankyou Justin Marceau
>
> John Manoussakis
> Boston College
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
Foucault's genealogies aren't going to tell you what
to think (what you *ought* to think) with respect to
displine, punishment, or sexuality. In the tradition
of Nietzsche, Foucault is a truth teller. As such,
his "historical" characterizations merely tell us what
has been and what might be right now, not what we
ought to do with it. As Foucault puts it in a 1983
interview "I would like to do a genealogy of problems,
of preblematiques. My point is not that everything is
bad, but that everything is *dangerous*, which is not
exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous,
then we always have something to do. So my position
leads not to apathy but to a hyper- and pessimistic
activism" (from Rabinow and Dreyfus, 1983). It's up
to us to make the dangerous decision of what
punishment ought to be, or whether it ought to be at
all.
Paul Bryant
Department of Philosophy
Loyola University of Chicago
--- MANOUSSJ <MANOUSSJ@xxxxxx> wrote:
> I only recently began reading Foucault and I while
> I am imediately taken by
> his gripping imagery and his striking comparisons I
> am having difficulty
> sifting out exactly what is HIS own opinion as
> distinct from the historical
> analysis of that which he is describing. If anyone
> could help point me to
> passages in "Discipline and Punish" which would
> indicate Foucault's own and
> original thought about "punishment".. its
> justification and its origins I
> would be very thankful.
>
> thankyou Justin Marceau
>
> John Manoussakis
> Boston College
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com