Of course ...
My question was ironic ....
>"How "should" one resist "oppressive knowledge" and power?"
>Well my understanding is not that opressive knowledge comes from somewhere
>elese but is very much apart of social construction, it already there in
>the western tradition, and in our identity formation. The wests telos as
>totalitarian night-mare, and no I am not talking about russia, seems to
>be resisted by foucaults hatred of modern scienific man, or the creature
>we
>understand to be modern man. Foucualt transgresses the limits of knowledge
>by questioning "positivity" in all it's modern and enlightenment forms.
>
>the whole thing is, that foucault works and thought is very much in the
>tradition of critical theory, and tries not to be "modernist" in the
>sence
>that it avoids implacing "resistence" "oppressive" dualities in
>attempting to understand the world
>
>Jeremiah
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Bob wrote:
>
> > Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 22:57:43 -0500
> > From: Bob <suannschafer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: Foucault and pragmatism, q&a
> >
> > >If one is to apply Foucault, oppressive
> > >knowledge and the power it wields upon the body, if oppressive, should be
> > >resisted.
> >
> > How "should" one resist "oppressive knowledge" and power?
> >
> > >What I've got to say that I think is
> > >somewhat new is that this may not lead to nihilism, as his
>critics complain,
> > >because there will always be more order to resist.
> >
> > Indeed!
> >
> > >There will always be
> > >discursive power and normalization.
> >
> > Indeed!
> >
My question was ironic ....
>"How "should" one resist "oppressive knowledge" and power?"
>Well my understanding is not that opressive knowledge comes from somewhere
>elese but is very much apart of social construction, it already there in
>the western tradition, and in our identity formation. The wests telos as
>totalitarian night-mare, and no I am not talking about russia, seems to
>be resisted by foucaults hatred of modern scienific man, or the creature
>we
>understand to be modern man. Foucualt transgresses the limits of knowledge
>by questioning "positivity" in all it's modern and enlightenment forms.
>
>the whole thing is, that foucault works and thought is very much in the
>tradition of critical theory, and tries not to be "modernist" in the
>sence
>that it avoids implacing "resistence" "oppressive" dualities in
>attempting to understand the world
>
>Jeremiah
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Bob wrote:
>
> > Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 22:57:43 -0500
> > From: Bob <suannschafer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: Foucault and pragmatism, q&a
> >
> > >If one is to apply Foucault, oppressive
> > >knowledge and the power it wields upon the body, if oppressive, should be
> > >resisted.
> >
> > How "should" one resist "oppressive knowledge" and power?
> >
> > >What I've got to say that I think is
> > >somewhat new is that this may not lead to nihilism, as his
>critics complain,
> > >because there will always be more order to resist.
> >
> > Indeed!
> >
> > >There will always be
> > >discursive power and normalization.
> >
> > Indeed!
> >