Before I start, let me say that I don't want Asher to get mad, read to
the end of the message before you come to a conclusion.
> > Foucault was an actively practicing
> > homosexual and so I would imagine, vaguely, that for him anything goes.
>
>Excuse me??
>Please tell me that you did not intend this to read as it does. Are you
>seriously intending to recreate The Homosexual as the deviant subject?
>
It is interesting that after affirming that there can be no normative
standards, that the transendental is flawed, that you still become
offended. In attacking this normative statement, you are guilty of
normativity.
The same for gendered universals. What is wrong with sexism, racism,
genocide for that matter under a pure Foucauldian world? Without a
right and wrong distinction, which you are assuming, there can be
nothing wrong with any type of domination. You said yourself:
"Domination is not evil until you apply normative standards" in your
last post.
> > Taylor also takes up a Kantian position about Foucault: what if everyone
> > believed the same thing?
>
>Then homosexuality would be immoral. Perhaps one of the reasons that the
>categorical imperative is a weak standard? Everyone does not believe the
>same thing.
You are conforming heavily to a norm. You find the implication that
homosexuality is immoral so offensive that you don't bother to say
why. You are also using equally discriminatory language in your email.
Labeling him a "Queer-basher."
As for "everyone does not believe the same thing," this is not an
indictment. The transendental principle is a priori. It exists
external to human consciousness, what people believe can be wrong.
I do not mean any of these comments to anger Asher or Vunch, the point
is that you are both assuming transendental principles without defining
or justifying them. There is an immenent necessity to determine right
and wrong or from here on out, anything goes. Why not exterminate
races of people? Until we have a moral system, there is no answer.
Note also that many of the comments do not reflect my moral beliefs,
they are meant to show the necessity of developing them.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
the end of the message before you come to a conclusion.
> > Foucault was an actively practicing
> > homosexual and so I would imagine, vaguely, that for him anything goes.
>
>Excuse me??
>Please tell me that you did not intend this to read as it does. Are you
>seriously intending to recreate The Homosexual as the deviant subject?
>
It is interesting that after affirming that there can be no normative
standards, that the transendental is flawed, that you still become
offended. In attacking this normative statement, you are guilty of
normativity.
The same for gendered universals. What is wrong with sexism, racism,
genocide for that matter under a pure Foucauldian world? Without a
right and wrong distinction, which you are assuming, there can be
nothing wrong with any type of domination. You said yourself:
"Domination is not evil until you apply normative standards" in your
last post.
> > Taylor also takes up a Kantian position about Foucault: what if everyone
> > believed the same thing?
>
>Then homosexuality would be immoral. Perhaps one of the reasons that the
>categorical imperative is a weak standard? Everyone does not believe the
>same thing.
You are conforming heavily to a norm. You find the implication that
homosexuality is immoral so offensive that you don't bother to say
why. You are also using equally discriminatory language in your email.
Labeling him a "Queer-basher."
As for "everyone does not believe the same thing," this is not an
indictment. The transendental principle is a priori. It exists
external to human consciousness, what people believe can be wrong.
I do not mean any of these comments to anger Asher or Vunch, the point
is that you are both assuming transendental principles without defining
or justifying them. There is an immenent necessity to determine right
and wrong or from here on out, anything goes. Why not exterminate
races of people? Until we have a moral system, there is no answer.
Note also that many of the comments do not reflect my moral beliefs,
they are meant to show the necessity of developing them.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com