1. I received 'Being and Power' by Hubert Dreyfus in the mail this week. Who
is next to get it? What is the address?
2. There has been a lot of discussion concerning volition on the list
lately. This reminds me of a thread a while back of 'will' and Deluze's
interpretation of F. I was never completely satisfied with the result of the
postings so maybe let me get back to the topic and ask a question of my own.
Where is the subject's relation to the self amongst the network of
discursive practices and institutions? I understand the individual is a
construction within these relations but nonetheless I agree with Thaddeus
that 'it is not all power.' Beyond discourse and 'counter-discourse' lies
the relation to the self and in this I fall pray to ambiguity. This is not
identity politics but the 'care of the self'--the aesthetic/ethic. Thus,
volition takes on a different hue. The subject is not 'free' but in some
sense more creative. This smells of Nietzsche, of course. The subject is
less reactive to discursive 'coercion' and can act--on a micro-level--
within a marginal discourse. Now, as far as this goes, what is the position
of this introverted 'margin' within the dominating discourse? What does it
mean to have an 'armor' against the proliferation of dominant discourse from
the media, etc.? Is it an ethic? A filter? Or just another way of reacting
to coercion without volition? Maybe I am confused.
-m
______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com?sr=mc.mk.mcm.tag001
is next to get it? What is the address?
2. There has been a lot of discussion concerning volition on the list
lately. This reminds me of a thread a while back of 'will' and Deluze's
interpretation of F. I was never completely satisfied with the result of the
postings so maybe let me get back to the topic and ask a question of my own.
Where is the subject's relation to the self amongst the network of
discursive practices and institutions? I understand the individual is a
construction within these relations but nonetheless I agree with Thaddeus
that 'it is not all power.' Beyond discourse and 'counter-discourse' lies
the relation to the self and in this I fall pray to ambiguity. This is not
identity politics but the 'care of the self'--the aesthetic/ethic. Thus,
volition takes on a different hue. The subject is not 'free' but in some
sense more creative. This smells of Nietzsche, of course. The subject is
less reactive to discursive 'coercion' and can act--on a micro-level--
within a marginal discourse. Now, as far as this goes, what is the position
of this introverted 'margin' within the dominating discourse? What does it
mean to have an 'armor' against the proliferation of dominant discourse from
the media, etc.? Is it an ethic? A filter? Or just another way of reacting
to coercion without volition? Maybe I am confused.
-m
______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com?sr=mc.mk.mcm.tag001