How can we escape idealism in politics, is it possible? If we have an ideal
state with an ideal of citizenship that has a kind of "macro" political
constraint on morality, i.e., law, then we don't need notions of "mass
movement" (which are really just convenient for floating abstractions). Why
are folks still trying to identify individuals with masses, that's my
ultimate question with regards for political theory. Why do we need to
identify our 'selves' with an ideal? Is it not the ideal that we have always
tried to comprehend? Should we displace it as some perfect thing in a
reality, a perfect state? Sorry, but I do not think there is any such thing
as "mass consciousness" (it's just too dreamy). I think we have ideals that
commonly or universally appeal (whichever is the greater aspiration) for
identifying our 'selves' with a state as we desire it to be, not necessarily
founded on a "reason for being", rather, on a condition that it will achieve
the ideal state as we want it to be. We have to make it happen without any
need for some gross symbolization of how it is supposedly happening, rather,
how ever it can happen. (sorry, if this isn't making sense).
Birgit Bock wrote:
> I think there are political implications in foucaults attack on both
> expert, common sense and specialized notions of science and history. if
> our
> mass
> consciousness, which could be termed modern configuration of knowledge
> just as well, is not perswauded or unquestioning influenced by the power
> of modern knowledge, we are indeed occupieing a space in which one can
> think differently. And thinking differently is political, in as much as
> all habit and action are motivated by our attitudes and perceptions of
> reality. Macro politics, what is that? it sounds like real politics, not
> the hair brain ideas of a few dreamers- but the cold hard reality
> of the " mass individual" in mordern society.
>
> And if we are going to limit ourselves to societies reality we have
> already are we not already lost. Is there any future in Macro politics?
> If there is anything to be gotten from foucault it is in part that we
> don't have to confine our experience with in the limits of Macro politics
> with out at the same time falling into idealism.
>
> jeremiah
>
> http://www.peak057.com/youselfdown/
--
Peter Rugh
Philosophy Undergrad
Indiana University
pcrugh.geo@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.geocities.com/pcrugh.geo/
state with an ideal of citizenship that has a kind of "macro" political
constraint on morality, i.e., law, then we don't need notions of "mass
movement" (which are really just convenient for floating abstractions). Why
are folks still trying to identify individuals with masses, that's my
ultimate question with regards for political theory. Why do we need to
identify our 'selves' with an ideal? Is it not the ideal that we have always
tried to comprehend? Should we displace it as some perfect thing in a
reality, a perfect state? Sorry, but I do not think there is any such thing
as "mass consciousness" (it's just too dreamy). I think we have ideals that
commonly or universally appeal (whichever is the greater aspiration) for
identifying our 'selves' with a state as we desire it to be, not necessarily
founded on a "reason for being", rather, on a condition that it will achieve
the ideal state as we want it to be. We have to make it happen without any
need for some gross symbolization of how it is supposedly happening, rather,
how ever it can happen. (sorry, if this isn't making sense).
Birgit Bock wrote:
> I think there are political implications in foucaults attack on both
> expert, common sense and specialized notions of science and history. if
> our
> mass
> consciousness, which could be termed modern configuration of knowledge
> just as well, is not perswauded or unquestioning influenced by the power
> of modern knowledge, we are indeed occupieing a space in which one can
> think differently. And thinking differently is political, in as much as
> all habit and action are motivated by our attitudes and perceptions of
> reality. Macro politics, what is that? it sounds like real politics, not
> the hair brain ideas of a few dreamers- but the cold hard reality
> of the " mass individual" in mordern society.
>
> And if we are going to limit ourselves to societies reality we have
> already are we not already lost. Is there any future in Macro politics?
> If there is anything to be gotten from foucault it is in part that we
> don't have to confine our experience with in the limits of Macro politics
> with out at the same time falling into idealism.
>
> jeremiah
>
> http://www.peak057.com/youselfdown/
--
Peter Rugh
Philosophy Undergrad
Indiana University
pcrugh.geo@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.geocities.com/pcrugh.geo/