That could take some time. However you should also define your terms.
Immanence of the text also sounds suspicious underridean and is reminiscent
of the olf "New Criticism;" What I mean by that is that you think texts can
be read out of context. Well everyone knows that is one way to read, but not
by any means the only one. Especially in philosophy. Again and I repeat: How
can the the life and activities of Michel Foucault and their relation to his
work, especially his sexual activities be narrated in his work?As Jim Miller
discusses this in his book THe Passion of Michel Foucault.
>From: Paul Bryant <levi_bryant@xxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: if -- And
>Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:43:06 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
> Then specify what it means for something to "inform" a reading that the
>immanence of the text could not provide on its own.
>Paul
> "Patrick M. Krueger" <Patrick.Krueger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Paul Bryant wrote:
>
> > Such a reading of Foucault is necessarily
> > reductive and based on the premise that his texts can be *explained*
> > by the fact that he engaged in practices often called "homosexual."
> > But if it's true that Foucault's texts can be *explained* by the fact
> > that he engaged in these practices, then it would seem to follow that
> > we can dispense with reading these texts altogether and just look at
> > "homosexuality" itself.
>
>it seems doubtfull that any biographical (sexual) account can *explain* a
>text, but that doesn't mean that biographical/sexual/cultural/contextual
>knowledge can't *inform* the reading of a text in some ways.
>
>pmk
>---
>By surgically removing a piece of
>information from the brain of the test monkey,
>researchers were able to extend the subject's life
>by 34 years and 174 days, thus proving that
>information is the most dangerous virus since
>macaroni worm.
>
>http://www.absurd.org
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year!
>http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Regards,
C.Driscoll
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Immanence of the text also sounds suspicious underridean and is reminiscent
of the olf "New Criticism;" What I mean by that is that you think texts can
be read out of context. Well everyone knows that is one way to read, but not
by any means the only one. Especially in philosophy. Again and I repeat: How
can the the life and activities of Michel Foucault and their relation to his
work, especially his sexual activities be narrated in his work?As Jim Miller
discusses this in his book THe Passion of Michel Foucault.
>From: Paul Bryant <levi_bryant@xxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: if -- And
>Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 11:43:06 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
> Then specify what it means for something to "inform" a reading that the
>immanence of the text could not provide on its own.
>Paul
> "Patrick M. Krueger" <Patrick.Krueger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Paul Bryant wrote:
>
> > Such a reading of Foucault is necessarily
> > reductive and based on the premise that his texts can be *explained*
> > by the fact that he engaged in practices often called "homosexual."
> > But if it's true that Foucault's texts can be *explained* by the fact
> > that he engaged in these practices, then it would seem to follow that
> > we can dispense with reading these texts altogether and just look at
> > "homosexuality" itself.
>
>it seems doubtfull that any biographical (sexual) account can *explain* a
>text, but that doesn't mean that biographical/sexual/cultural/contextual
>knowledge can't *inform* the reading of a text in some ways.
>
>pmk
>---
>By surgically removing a piece of
>information from the brain of the test monkey,
>researchers were able to extend the subject's life
>by 34 years and 174 days, thus proving that
>information is the most dangerous virus since
>macaroni worm.
>
>http://www.absurd.org
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year!
>http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Regards,
C.Driscoll
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com