RE: Problematizing

I can't remember, he might have rejected the theorist label, but Foucault has
morph'ed so many times in his career, it's hard to say he never was a
theorist. Besides ... just because he claims he is not one, doesn't mean he
is more right than those who label him as such ;-) (for that matter, Foucault
also, at some point, rejected the "philosopher" label, the "anarchist" label,
among others)

Back to "problematize"... I seem to recall Foucault saying that he refuse to
be part of the "politics", and that his role is to map out the mechanism of
domination in all its complexity in order to provoke resistance and doubts and
uncertainties. He also claim that his goal is to effect a societal change
much more profound than redrafting the law.


>===== Original Message From "McIntyre" <mcintyre@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> =====
>Does he not reject being labelled a theorist insisting that he is an
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "claudius" <claudius.laumanns@xxxxxx>
>To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 7:46 PM
>Subject: AW: Problematizing
>> He says he is a theorist of the new social movements. So he lookes at the
>> prison riots, the feminists, the anti- medical movement etc. to see at
>> point of oppression they start to problemize. Further his thesis is that
>> can`t devide between power an knowledge. So he thinks that his ability to
>> problemize as a theorist is a function of these attacks against oppression
>> (or is it domination??? I am not a native speaker, too)
>> Claudius
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Cordelia
>> Chu
>> Gesendet: Samstag, 6. Dezember 2003 20:26
>> An: Mark Kelly; foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Betreff: RE: Problematizing
>> It comes as a shock to me too O_O I just notice I searched under
>> 'problematise', which is why the
>> word is not found.
>> Moving onto a slightly more general question: did Foucault simply pointed
>> out
>> that our society
>> problematized sexuality / homosexuality / madness etc? Or, did Foucault
>> himself problematized
>> the discourse/ history of these issues? (pretending that these subjects
>> not seen as "problems"
>> before Foucault pointed it out)
>> -Cordelia
>> >===== Original Message From "Mark Kelly" <mgekelly@xxxxxxxxxxx> =====
>> >The OED definition: problematize, v. Obs. rare-1. [f. as prec. + -ize.]
>> >intr. To propound problems.
>> >First recorded in 1630, which comes as a shock to me - I'd always thought
>> it
>> >had been invented be Foucault, or rather his translators. In Foucauldian
>> >usage, I recognise it, with Larry, as meaning when one takes something to
>> be
>> >a problem. Hence, our society problematizes sexuality, whereas previous
>> >societies did not, or at least did so in a different way.
>> >
>> >Mark

Partial thread listing: