Re: Foucault and pragmatism, q&a

Who cares about the long-term survival of the human race if people decide
they all want to embrace homosexual "settings"?

Besides, Vunch, is Foucault REALLY saying we should all be gay? Is he REALLY
saying that heterosexuality should disappear?

Of course not.

Paul Bove has a really great criticism of Taylor in Deleuze's book on


----- Original Message -----
From: <Vunch@xxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: Foucault and pragmatism, q&a

> In a message dated 4/28/01 10:14:46 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> writes:
> > also, what is the function of a theoretical discourse (or rhetoric, in
> > sense of burke) which relies less on persuasion and more on
> > if these discourses work to create an orientation (or re-orient), can
> > be considered negligible? how could one even measure their effect?
> In most discussions of Foucault, the content is usually lost. The
> questions are not why is domination exercised. Many philosophers have
> answered this satisfactorily. Foucault is addressing the problem of how
> domination works.
> Much of what he writes about is understood as abstract technique, for
> example, his understanding of prison construction, clinical diagnostic
> procedures, etc. But, the main idea that Foucault is always addressing is
> how the techniques work, how does power put one side above another and in
> turn form a resistance to it.
> Charles Taylor writes a wonderful criticism of Foucault where he states
> reasons why Foucault is unacceptable. Foucault understands the chestnut
> the problem of sexual identity. Heterosexual values are forced upon us
> bisexual and homosexual values are restricted. Perhaps, the term values
> not exact enough - heterosexual settings are forced upon us and bisexual
> homosexual settings are restricted. The manner in which this occurs is
> and therefore varies from location to location and from historical period
> period. Taylor levels the charge at Foucault that he claims that the
> (the power) is heterosexuality and the resistance is therefore
> and that the direction of history is the usurping of heterosexuality!
> finds this disastrous because of the problem of the survivial of the human
> race if heterosexuality is undermined, but he also recoils at the
> adoption of a homosexual attitude!
> Putting the content of Foucault's project forward in terms of the
> gay-straight knot
> does not explicate the myriad forms that this conflict takes where
> heterosexual settings castigate homosexuals and homosexual settings and
> functions discipline and upset heterosexuals' dispositions. But, where
> Foucault discusses at length the notion of strategies of discipline he is
> usually referring this kind of problem.
> Vunch

Partial thread listing: