--part1_c2.574aefa.278c034d_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 1/8/01 11:12:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
bxh306@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> Thus, when you ask "Are there any fundamental objections to use Foucault's
> insights on productive power in a rational choice context?", the answer
> would have to be that the use of F's insights would subvert the context in
> which you want to use them.
>
Foucault should been interpreted as one who has contributed to the
'rationality debate.' In general, rationality can be defined as the most
reasonable or the most critical form of reasoning. Certainly, Foucault
himself uses a certain form of reasoning that does attempt to critisize other
approaches to rationality, namely, the instrumental. Although Foucault
expressly distances himself from phenomenological and hermeneutic models of
rationality, he would probably fall within these fields, that is, when he
becomes accepted! If you look at the misinterpretation, or extrapolation of
Foucault's position by his critics like Charles Taylor, then serious deficits
to Foucault's rationality seem obvious. However, if you take Foucault's
basic methodology as his rational model, how can anyone argue at all about
its rationality??
--part1_c2.574aefa.278c034d_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 1/8/01 11:12:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, <BR>bxh306@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Thus, when you ask "Are there any fundamental objections to use Foucault's
<BR>insights on productive power in a rational choice context?", the answer
<BR>would have to be that the use of F's insights would subvert the context in
<BR>which you want to use them.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>Foucault should been interpreted as one who has contributed to the <BR>'rationality debate.' In general, rationality can be defined as the most <BR>reasonable or the most critical form of reasoning. Certainly, Foucault <BR>himself uses a certain form of reasoning that does attempt to critisize other <BR>approaches to rationality, namely, the instrumental. Although Foucault <BR>expressly distances himself from phenomenological and hermeneutic models of <BR>rationality, he would probably fall within these fields, that is, when he <BR>becomes accepted! If you look at the misinterpretation, or extrapolation of <BR>Foucault's position by his critics like Charles Taylor, then serious deficits <BR>to Foucault's rationality seem obvious. However, if you take Foucault's <BR>basic methodology as his rational model, how can anyone argue at all about <BR>its rationality??</FONT></HTML>
--part1_c2.574aefa.278c034d_boundary--