Re: the road ahead

This is why I said "seriously" at the end of my post. I've frankly never met
a reader of Foucault who wasn't basically a liberal ironist, where liberal
is defined as someone who tries to eradicate cruelty and ironist is defined
as someone who recognizes the contingency and groundlessness of her values.

I imagine nearly all of you will find this label to be rank and offensive...


----- Original Message -----
From: <pcrugh.geo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: the road ahead

> I think what our sponsors are trying to telling us is that we need to
> stay sharp, stick to the law, be nice, and smile more often. My previous
> (DR: OFF DISCUSSION) post was not intended for the listserv, oops (but
> this is). I wouldn't disclose information that is prohibited to anyone,
> seriously.
> We've had problems with this word: fairness. Allow me to offer a
> definition, please.
> Fairness: a universal moral judgment, i.e., applicable to all. If you
> can figure it out, please TELL us, or some source of it.
> Wollen Sie mir email in Deutsche oder English shreiben, bitte?
> pcrugh.geo@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Nathan Goralnik wrote:
> > What are we, fair friends, if not liberal ironists, after all?
> >
> > Seriously.
> >
> > ~Nate
> >
> > --
> >
> > "The living body is a loving body, and the loving
> > body is a speaking body. Without love we are nothing
> > but walking corpses. Love is essential to the living
> > body, and it is essential in bringing the living
> > body to life in language." ~Kelly Oliver
> --
> Peter

Partial thread listing: