well i use it to teach introduction to law ......
2008/10/1 Vemuri, Chathan V <chathan-vemuri@xxxxxxxxx>
> Hey guys,
>
> Some people are of the opinion that The Order of Things is an outdated work
> with a misleading premise of the death of man via language that they discard
> in favor of his other writings on prisons and sexuality, etc. I think The
> Order of Things still has much relevance for modern understanding of the
> social sciences and that the ending is far too misunderstood, especially by
> Ian Hacking (who pushes a Kantian interpretation of Foucault). To me, it
> seems his proclamation of the "death of Man" is not so much a proclamation
> that man has already died but a future warning or hypothesis that our
> current notion of Man as a Cartesian subject which originated in the 17th
> century or so is a recent invention that will have its end eventually like
> all other meta concepts. Yet many view this as Foucault already proclaiming
> that man has already disappeared via the configuration of language, and that
> this prediction is miscast (notably Foucault interpreters such as Rabinow
> and even Hacking) t!
> hus the reason why I think this book has been downplayed in favor of
> Discipline and Punish, History of Sexuality and other works (though those
> are my favorites). I was wondering what you guys thought about the relevance
> of The Order of Things and your interpretation of his prediction at the end.
> I feel the work is very much essential to understanding the general logic
> behind Foucault's work, as well as The Archaeology of Knowledge, thus why I
> recommended it to someone who was beginning to read Foucault for the first
> time.
>
> I would love to hear from you guys as soon as possible.
>
> Chathan Vemuri
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
--
Martin Hardie,
Law Lecturer,
School of Law,
Deakin University (Geelong Campus)
Pigdons Road,
Waurn Ponds,
Victoria, 3216,
Australia.
mhardie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
martin.hardie@xxxxxxxxx
skype/irc: auskadi
2008/10/1 Vemuri, Chathan V <chathan-vemuri@xxxxxxxxx>
> Hey guys,
>
> Some people are of the opinion that The Order of Things is an outdated work
> with a misleading premise of the death of man via language that they discard
> in favor of his other writings on prisons and sexuality, etc. I think The
> Order of Things still has much relevance for modern understanding of the
> social sciences and that the ending is far too misunderstood, especially by
> Ian Hacking (who pushes a Kantian interpretation of Foucault). To me, it
> seems his proclamation of the "death of Man" is not so much a proclamation
> that man has already died but a future warning or hypothesis that our
> current notion of Man as a Cartesian subject which originated in the 17th
> century or so is a recent invention that will have its end eventually like
> all other meta concepts. Yet many view this as Foucault already proclaiming
> that man has already disappeared via the configuration of language, and that
> this prediction is miscast (notably Foucault interpreters such as Rabinow
> and even Hacking) t!
> hus the reason why I think this book has been downplayed in favor of
> Discipline and Punish, History of Sexuality and other works (though those
> are my favorites). I was wondering what you guys thought about the relevance
> of The Order of Things and your interpretation of his prediction at the end.
> I feel the work is very much essential to understanding the general logic
> behind Foucault's work, as well as The Archaeology of Knowledge, thus why I
> recommended it to someone who was beginning to read Foucault for the first
> time.
>
> I would love to hear from you guys as soon as possible.
>
> Chathan Vemuri
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
--
Martin Hardie,
Law Lecturer,
School of Law,
Deakin University (Geelong Campus)
Pigdons Road,
Waurn Ponds,
Victoria, 3216,
Australia.
mhardie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
martin.hardie@xxxxxxxxx
skype/irc: auskadi