>No I don't believe that is what I said. The point is, rather, that to use
>Foucault's critique against Foucault (which is certainly possibly and
>probably necessary) you first must concede the legitimacy of the criticism
>in some form. To say that Foucault's theories prove Foucault is dangerous
>does not disprove the theories, but instead _demonstrate_ their validity.
Two arguments:
1. Then the same would apply to positivism. The fact that it kills
itself would demonstrate its validity. I am saying that in conceding
F to be the absolute fact other than a theory would make it implode.
2. My main idea is that I cannot gain fact emprically. We do not know
whether our senses render us an acurate picture of corpereal reality.
There is no way I have seen to disprove the Idealist picture of the
world (only insofar as the basic idea that thoughts alone could exist).
All corporeal fact is also based on inductive reasoning which renders a
usually erring categorization of reality. These categories (such as
power, discourse, etc.) are not a fact but can be a very useful way to
interpret and utilize when forced to act in such an otherwise
unintelegible reality.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>Foucault's critique against Foucault (which is certainly possibly and
>probably necessary) you first must concede the legitimacy of the criticism
>in some form. To say that Foucault's theories prove Foucault is dangerous
>does not disprove the theories, but instead _demonstrate_ their validity.
Two arguments:
1. Then the same would apply to positivism. The fact that it kills
itself would demonstrate its validity. I am saying that in conceding
F to be the absolute fact other than a theory would make it implode.
2. My main idea is that I cannot gain fact emprically. We do not know
whether our senses render us an acurate picture of corpereal reality.
There is no way I have seen to disprove the Idealist picture of the
world (only insofar as the basic idea that thoughts alone could exist).
All corporeal fact is also based on inductive reasoning which renders a
usually erring categorization of reality. These categories (such as
power, discourse, etc.) are not a fact but can be a very useful way to
interpret and utilize when forced to act in such an otherwise
unintelegible reality.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com