--0-74146564-994277706=:38424
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I think it's important to be careful with Foucault's use of the word "fictions". It seems to me that Foucault is not so much proposing that he is telling stories or writing novels, but nodding to the idea that a theory is always a sort of fiction insofar as a theory is the condition under which factual statements can be produced, not the reverse. This, however, does not mean that theories are arbitrary constructions up to the whim of individuals. In other words, on the basis of a theory we generate factual statements. This notion of fiction, which Foucault was also wont to refer to as problematizations, shares a remarkable similarity to Kant's concept of regulative ideals (a concept later taken up by Deleuze in his ontology of problems). A regulative ideal is a sort of unifying system that in and of itself constitutes *no* knowledge, but which is a necessary condition for the production of knowledge and the unification of science. Kant goes so far as to refer to these regulative ideas as necessary fictions. This same sort of theme manifests itself in Foucault's concepts of epistemes and power structures. An episteme and a power structure is neither true nor false, but is a unifying structure that draws the heterogeneous together in a problematic field. It is the condition for the production of truth, not the truth itself. As such, it is quite indifferent to evaluations of truth or falsity, and therefore has the status of a fiction. In other words, Foucault's remarks about epistemes and power structures are transcendental claim, though after the fashion of a historical a priori and not a transcendental subject. Foucault himself develops these notions in the essays and interviews published in the semiotext _The Politics of Truth_.
Best Regards,
Paul
charmaine driscoll <missplateau@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -- Then this too needs to be investigated. And also one has to ask:how his
plays a role in covering up F's own strategies of authorship. I sense that F
wished to be seen somewhat fictionally. There is an interview somewhere
where he states his work is fiction but true. I am not certain of where that
statement can be found. But the violence in his work and life, which.
G.Deleuze speaks of is noticeable in the statement that you have quoted. I
will have to dig up some of the critiques by feminists of F.
>What, do you imagine that I would take so much trouble and so much pleasure
>in writing, do you think that I would keep so persistently to my task, if I
>were not preparing-- with a rather shaky hand --a labyrinth into which I
>can venture, in which I can move my discourse, opening up underground
>passages, forcing it to go far from itself, finding overhangs that reduce
>and deform its itinerary, in which I can lose myself and appear at last to
>eyes that I will never have to meet again. I am no doubt not the only one
>who writes in order to have no face. DO NOT ASK WHO i AM AND DO NOT ASK ME
>TO REMAIN THE SAME: LEAVE IT TO OUR BUREAUCRATS AND OUR POLICE TO SEE THAT
>OUR PAPERS ARE IN ORDER. At least spare us their morality when we write.'"
>(Foucault 1972; 17).
>
Regards,
C.Driscoll
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year!
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
--0-74146564-994277706=:38424
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<P> I think it's important to be careful with Foucault's use of the word "fictions". It seems to me that Foucault is not so much proposing that he is telling stories or writing novels, but nodding to the idea that a theory is always a sort of fiction insofar as a theory is the condition under which factual statements can be produced, not the reverse. This, however, does not mean that theories are arbitrary constructions up to the whim of individuals. In other words, on the basis of a theory we generate factual statements. This notion of fiction, which Foucault was also wont to refer to as problematizations, shares a remarkable similarity to Kant's concept of regulative ideals (a concept later taken up by Deleuze in his ontology of problems). A regulative ideal is a sort of unifying system that in and of itself constitutes *no* knowledge, but which is a necessary condition for the production of knowledge and the unification of science. Kant goes so far as to refer to these regulative ideas as necessary fictions. This same sort of theme manifests itself in Foucault's concepts of epistemes and power structures. An episteme and a power structure is neither true nor false, but is a unifying structure that draws the heterogeneous together in a problematic field. It is the condition for the production of truth, not the truth itself. As such, it is quite indifferent to evaluations of truth or falsity, and therefore has the status of a fiction. In other words, Foucault's remarks about epistemes and power structures are transcendental claim, though after the fashion of a historical a priori and not a transcendental subject. Foucault himself develops these notions in the essays and interviews published in the semiotext _The Politics of Truth_.
<P>Best Regards,
<P>Paul
<P> <B><I>charmaine driscoll <missplateau@xxxxxxxxxxx></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">-- Then this too needs to be investigated. And also one has to ask:how his <BR>plays a role in covering up F's own strategies of authorship. I sense that F <BR>wished to be seen somewhat fictionally. There is an interview somewhere <BR>where he states his work is fiction but true. I am not certain of where that <BR>statement can be found. But the violence in his work and life, which. <BR>G.Deleuze speaks of is noticeable in the statement that you have quoted. I <BR>will have to dig up some of the critiques by feminists of F.<BR><BR><BR>>What, do you imagine that I would take so much trouble and so much pleasure <BR>>in writing, do you think that I would keep so persistently to my task, if I <BR>>were not preparing-- with a rather shaky hand --a labyrinth into which I <BR>>can venture, in which I can move my discourse, opening up underground <BR>>passages, forcing it to go far from itself, finding overhangs that reduce <BR>>and deform its itinerary, in which I can lose myself and appear at last to <BR>>eyes that I will never have to meet again. I am no doubt not the only one <BR>>who writes in order to have no face. DO NOT ASK WHO i AM AND DO NOT ASK ME <BR>>TO REMAIN THE SAME: LEAVE IT TO OUR BUREAUCRATS AND OUR POLICE TO SEE THAT <BR>>OUR PAPERS ARE IN ORDER. At least spare us their morality when we write.'" <BR>>(Foucault 1972; 17).<BR>><BR><BR><BR><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>C.Driscoll<BR><BR>_________________________________________________________________<BR>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><br><hr size=1><b>Do You Yahoo!?</b><br>
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year!<BR><a href="http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=tagline";>http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/</a>
--0-74146564-994277706=:38424--
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I think it's important to be careful with Foucault's use of the word "fictions". It seems to me that Foucault is not so much proposing that he is telling stories or writing novels, but nodding to the idea that a theory is always a sort of fiction insofar as a theory is the condition under which factual statements can be produced, not the reverse. This, however, does not mean that theories are arbitrary constructions up to the whim of individuals. In other words, on the basis of a theory we generate factual statements. This notion of fiction, which Foucault was also wont to refer to as problematizations, shares a remarkable similarity to Kant's concept of regulative ideals (a concept later taken up by Deleuze in his ontology of problems). A regulative ideal is a sort of unifying system that in and of itself constitutes *no* knowledge, but which is a necessary condition for the production of knowledge and the unification of science. Kant goes so far as to refer to these regulative ideas as necessary fictions. This same sort of theme manifests itself in Foucault's concepts of epistemes and power structures. An episteme and a power structure is neither true nor false, but is a unifying structure that draws the heterogeneous together in a problematic field. It is the condition for the production of truth, not the truth itself. As such, it is quite indifferent to evaluations of truth or falsity, and therefore has the status of a fiction. In other words, Foucault's remarks about epistemes and power structures are transcendental claim, though after the fashion of a historical a priori and not a transcendental subject. Foucault himself develops these notions in the essays and interviews published in the semiotext _The Politics of Truth_.
Best Regards,
Paul
charmaine driscoll <missplateau@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -- Then this too needs to be investigated. And also one has to ask:how his
plays a role in covering up F's own strategies of authorship. I sense that F
wished to be seen somewhat fictionally. There is an interview somewhere
where he states his work is fiction but true. I am not certain of where that
statement can be found. But the violence in his work and life, which.
G.Deleuze speaks of is noticeable in the statement that you have quoted. I
will have to dig up some of the critiques by feminists of F.
>What, do you imagine that I would take so much trouble and so much pleasure
>in writing, do you think that I would keep so persistently to my task, if I
>were not preparing-- with a rather shaky hand --a labyrinth into which I
>can venture, in which I can move my discourse, opening up underground
>passages, forcing it to go far from itself, finding overhangs that reduce
>and deform its itinerary, in which I can lose myself and appear at last to
>eyes that I will never have to meet again. I am no doubt not the only one
>who writes in order to have no face. DO NOT ASK WHO i AM AND DO NOT ASK ME
>TO REMAIN THE SAME: LEAVE IT TO OUR BUREAUCRATS AND OUR POLICE TO SEE THAT
>OUR PAPERS ARE IN ORDER. At least spare us their morality when we write.'"
>(Foucault 1972; 17).
>
Regards,
C.Driscoll
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year!
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
--0-74146564-994277706=:38424
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<P> I think it's important to be careful with Foucault's use of the word "fictions". It seems to me that Foucault is not so much proposing that he is telling stories or writing novels, but nodding to the idea that a theory is always a sort of fiction insofar as a theory is the condition under which factual statements can be produced, not the reverse. This, however, does not mean that theories are arbitrary constructions up to the whim of individuals. In other words, on the basis of a theory we generate factual statements. This notion of fiction, which Foucault was also wont to refer to as problematizations, shares a remarkable similarity to Kant's concept of regulative ideals (a concept later taken up by Deleuze in his ontology of problems). A regulative ideal is a sort of unifying system that in and of itself constitutes *no* knowledge, but which is a necessary condition for the production of knowledge and the unification of science. Kant goes so far as to refer to these regulative ideas as necessary fictions. This same sort of theme manifests itself in Foucault's concepts of epistemes and power structures. An episteme and a power structure is neither true nor false, but is a unifying structure that draws the heterogeneous together in a problematic field. It is the condition for the production of truth, not the truth itself. As such, it is quite indifferent to evaluations of truth or falsity, and therefore has the status of a fiction. In other words, Foucault's remarks about epistemes and power structures are transcendental claim, though after the fashion of a historical a priori and not a transcendental subject. Foucault himself develops these notions in the essays and interviews published in the semiotext _The Politics of Truth_.
<P>Best Regards,
<P>Paul
<P> <B><I>charmaine driscoll <missplateau@xxxxxxxxxxx></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">-- Then this too needs to be investigated. And also one has to ask:how his <BR>plays a role in covering up F's own strategies of authorship. I sense that F <BR>wished to be seen somewhat fictionally. There is an interview somewhere <BR>where he states his work is fiction but true. I am not certain of where that <BR>statement can be found. But the violence in his work and life, which. <BR>G.Deleuze speaks of is noticeable in the statement that you have quoted. I <BR>will have to dig up some of the critiques by feminists of F.<BR><BR><BR>>What, do you imagine that I would take so much trouble and so much pleasure <BR>>in writing, do you think that I would keep so persistently to my task, if I <BR>>were not preparing-- with a rather shaky hand --a labyrinth into which I <BR>>can venture, in which I can move my discourse, opening up underground <BR>>passages, forcing it to go far from itself, finding overhangs that reduce <BR>>and deform its itinerary, in which I can lose myself and appear at last to <BR>>eyes that I will never have to meet again. I am no doubt not the only one <BR>>who writes in order to have no face. DO NOT ASK WHO i AM AND DO NOT ASK ME <BR>>TO REMAIN THE SAME: LEAVE IT TO OUR BUREAUCRATS AND OUR POLICE TO SEE THAT <BR>>OUR PAPERS ARE IN ORDER. At least spare us their morality when we write.'" <BR>>(Foucault 1972; 17).<BR>><BR><BR><BR><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>C.Driscoll<BR><BR>_________________________________________________________________<BR>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><br><hr size=1><b>Do You Yahoo!?</b><br>
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year!<BR><a href="http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=tagline";>http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/</a>
--0-74146564-994277706=:38424--