Re: [Foucault-L] The agent discussion once more

It does seem to me that an important prelimary analysis to the analysis of of the possibility of 'agency' in Foucault would be an analysis, ala Nietzsche, of 'why agency'? One can certainly proceed as most philosophers do and assume that one knows in advance that agency exists and cobble together the materials that one likes in order to proclaim the Truth of agency as whatever one wants it to be. However, I would be more interested in a genealogy of agency to see how it has been historically construed and enacted and then look at Foucault to see how he fits (or doesn't) in that lineage. If we do follow Foucault, it would seem that there is no essential being to agency, but only different formations of agency (knowing that agency may cease to be relevant or even to exist in the future, as was the case in the past). I don't want to know somebody's new true Truth of agency (the Truth is boring), to paraphrase James, I want to know its cash value in the world today.
-Cory

_________________________________________________________________
Testez Windows Live Mail Beta ! http://www.ideas.live.com/


Partial thread listing: