Also, 'knowledge is power' is a common expression which, as usually with
common expressions, tends to simplify things, leaving their main 'core'.
The expression implies an equation 'knowledge = power' and one which is
one-way (knowledge brings power and that's it), whereas for Foucault the
relation between the two is not linear but spiral and two-way. Also,
'power' is not to be understood as a monolithic exertion of force, but
as 'a multiplicity of force relations immanent in the sphere in which
they operate and which constitute their own organisation' (History of
Sexuality)
Hiro Saito wrote:
>> From: John Patrick <panoptician@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> The common expression "knowledge is power" seems to summarize his
>> position.There doesn't seem to be anything revolutionary about that.
>> Is the interpretation that "knowledge is power" an oversimplification
>> of his work?
>
>
> While I don't know exactly what the common expression means as well as
> I'm not particularly familiar with the genealogy of the expression, I
> would say the expression "knowledge is power" is too simplistic if
> 'knowledge' here is understood as a "system" of representations of the
> (pre-existing) "reality."
>
> As some people discussed recently within the context of Said, a
> discourse can create the very "reality" that it purports to
> re-present. For instance, by drawing on Foucault's concept of
> discourse, Said argues that the Orientalism constitutes the reality of
> the Orient through statements that claim to re-present or express the
> reality of the Orient. Thus, power or domination can creep into
> knowledge as the constitution of what counts as real.
>
> Well, it's Saturday morning....
>
> Hiro
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
common expressions, tends to simplify things, leaving their main 'core'.
The expression implies an equation 'knowledge = power' and one which is
one-way (knowledge brings power and that's it), whereas for Foucault the
relation between the two is not linear but spiral and two-way. Also,
'power' is not to be understood as a monolithic exertion of force, but
as 'a multiplicity of force relations immanent in the sphere in which
they operate and which constitute their own organisation' (History of
Sexuality)
Hiro Saito wrote:
>> From: John Patrick <panoptician@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> The common expression "knowledge is power" seems to summarize his
>> position.There doesn't seem to be anything revolutionary about that.
>> Is the interpretation that "knowledge is power" an oversimplification
>> of his work?
>
>
> While I don't know exactly what the common expression means as well as
> I'm not particularly familiar with the genealogy of the expression, I
> would say the expression "knowledge is power" is too simplistic if
> 'knowledge' here is understood as a "system" of representations of the
> (pre-existing) "reality."
>
> As some people discussed recently within the context of Said, a
> discourse can create the very "reality" that it purports to
> re-present. For instance, by drawing on Foucault's concept of
> discourse, Said argues that the Orientalism constitutes the reality of
> the Orient through statements that claim to re-present or express the
> reality of the Orient. Thus, power or domination can creep into
> knowledge as the constitution of what counts as real.
>
> Well, it's Saturday morning....
>
> Hiro
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>