And just a little bit more to say...
>>I think the bottom line is that Foucault was interested in demonstrating that
>>nothing in our culture, society or experience is fixed or self evident and he used
>>methods of intellectual argumentation and tools from his own cultural heritage
>>to put forward this position.
I think he was more interested in demonstrating how power operates discursively and he used methods of intellectual argumentation and tools from his own cultural heritage to put forward this position.
>>The methods of intellectual argumentation he used are not the sole property of
>>European Enlightenment thinkers
Of course they aren't. If I didn't resolutely believe that, I wouldn't be here in the first place. I am also free to engage with these tools and then further problematize them as well as problematize my ‘self’ which engages with these tools, aren't I?
- as those Enlightenment thinkers would like
>>us to believe incidentally - a convenient way of condemning everybody else to
>>silence and incoherence.
Another thing that I should perhaps say is that e.g., David Owen's book delineates an 'alternative' lineage of Enlightenment thought which would not condemn everyone else (by the way, who's 'else'? and who are 'those'?) to silence and incoherence....
I've always had a fondness for Enlightenment. I find it to be beautiful (the thought, that is). The 'West' need not be ashamed of it. It wasn't Enlightenment that plundered and colonized, though at times it was filched for the purpose of legitimating such acts....
Look, to be honest, I don't accede to your interpretation of Foucault's work at all. You seem to be horrified with the very suggestion that Foucault could be considered the last descendant of Enlightenment and/or that he himself decided in one article called ‘What is Enlightenment?’ to put himself forward as such. But why is that so bad? I think it’s kind of cool. My relationship with Foucault is problematic not so much because he is one but because… well, I don’t want to say… but it has more to do with the flaws in my reasoning...flaws in my premise....
Kaori
>>I think the bottom line is that Foucault was interested in demonstrating that
>>nothing in our culture, society or experience is fixed or self evident and he used
>>methods of intellectual argumentation and tools from his own cultural heritage
>>to put forward this position.
I think he was more interested in demonstrating how power operates discursively and he used methods of intellectual argumentation and tools from his own cultural heritage to put forward this position.
>>The methods of intellectual argumentation he used are not the sole property of
>>European Enlightenment thinkers
Of course they aren't. If I didn't resolutely believe that, I wouldn't be here in the first place. I am also free to engage with these tools and then further problematize them as well as problematize my ‘self’ which engages with these tools, aren't I?
- as those Enlightenment thinkers would like
>>us to believe incidentally - a convenient way of condemning everybody else to
>>silence and incoherence.
Another thing that I should perhaps say is that e.g., David Owen's book delineates an 'alternative' lineage of Enlightenment thought which would not condemn everyone else (by the way, who's 'else'? and who are 'those'?) to silence and incoherence....
I've always had a fondness for Enlightenment. I find it to be beautiful (the thought, that is). The 'West' need not be ashamed of it. It wasn't Enlightenment that plundered and colonized, though at times it was filched for the purpose of legitimating such acts....
Look, to be honest, I don't accede to your interpretation of Foucault's work at all. You seem to be horrified with the very suggestion that Foucault could be considered the last descendant of Enlightenment and/or that he himself decided in one article called ‘What is Enlightenment?’ to put himself forward as such. But why is that so bad? I think it’s kind of cool. My relationship with Foucault is problematic not so much because he is one but because… well, I don’t want to say… but it has more to do with the flaws in my reasoning...flaws in my premise....
Kaori