Since you speak of "fiction", do you think you could help explain what
Foucault meant when he said his works like "fictions"?
On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 8:36 AM, <R.Thomas-Pellicer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Chatan,
>
> 1/ Glad you gain more and more confidence in your views. As I keep
> restating, Foucault, Gutting, or whoever else, should always be used
> 'instrumentally'--which is not synonymous with disrespectfully-- for the
> agenda of your own time, to help you think by yourself. In transposition.
> Orthodoxy is born out of mummifying the statements of the tradition. The
> tradition should serve the purposes of the present, not those of the past.
>
> 2/ There are many ways to answer the daunting questions you set. I shall
> answer them via my own process of minute Enlightenment during my doctoral
> times, which I am about to complete. I will highlight two reciprocal
> processes:
>
> A/ This frist point is a rephrasing of 1/. Glad there are "founders of
> discursivity" (cf 'What is an author?'). It is really them who help you
> think. Not because you shall be in agreement with them, but because they
> incite you to be in agreement with them with a twist-and this twist is your
> precious contribution to knowledge.
>
>
>
>
> B/ Without The Order of Things -and other works, I would have been unable
> to think -or rather, unthink, elaborate a critique of- 'sustainability'. So
> yes, the 'fiction' that Foucault sets out in OT paves the ground for a
> transition away from the modern mode of being -in my case- not so much
> towards a postmodern as to an ecocidal mode of being.
>
>
>
>
> Maybe on grounds of the eccentricity of this work, The OT has served the
> purposes of my own scholarship enormously. Way better than a great deal that
> goes by the name of "environmentalism", "sustainable development", etc. And
> regardless as well of the position of the critique on this work. Repeating
> myself ad nauseam, I harness all my sources instrumentally.
>
>
>
>
> Ruth Thomas-Pellicer
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> "After Nietzsche's devastating criticism of those 'last men' who 'invented
> happiness,' I may leave aside altogether the naïve optimism in which science
> -that is, the technique of mastering life which rests upon science- has been
> celebrated as the way to happiness. Who believes in this? -aside from a few
> big children in university chairs or editorial offices." -Max Weber
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
--
Chetan Vemuri
West Des Moines, IA
aryavartacnsrn@xxxxxxxxx
(515)-418-2771
"You say you want a Revolution! Well you know, we all want to change the
world"
Foucault meant when he said his works like "fictions"?
On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 8:36 AM, <R.Thomas-Pellicer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Chatan,
>
> 1/ Glad you gain more and more confidence in your views. As I keep
> restating, Foucault, Gutting, or whoever else, should always be used
> 'instrumentally'--which is not synonymous with disrespectfully-- for the
> agenda of your own time, to help you think by yourself. In transposition.
> Orthodoxy is born out of mummifying the statements of the tradition. The
> tradition should serve the purposes of the present, not those of the past.
>
> 2/ There are many ways to answer the daunting questions you set. I shall
> answer them via my own process of minute Enlightenment during my doctoral
> times, which I am about to complete. I will highlight two reciprocal
> processes:
>
> A/ This frist point is a rephrasing of 1/. Glad there are "founders of
> discursivity" (cf 'What is an author?'). It is really them who help you
> think. Not because you shall be in agreement with them, but because they
> incite you to be in agreement with them with a twist-and this twist is your
> precious contribution to knowledge.
>
>
>
>
> B/ Without The Order of Things -and other works, I would have been unable
> to think -or rather, unthink, elaborate a critique of- 'sustainability'. So
> yes, the 'fiction' that Foucault sets out in OT paves the ground for a
> transition away from the modern mode of being -in my case- not so much
> towards a postmodern as to an ecocidal mode of being.
>
>
>
>
> Maybe on grounds of the eccentricity of this work, The OT has served the
> purposes of my own scholarship enormously. Way better than a great deal that
> goes by the name of "environmentalism", "sustainable development", etc. And
> regardless as well of the position of the critique on this work. Repeating
> myself ad nauseam, I harness all my sources instrumentally.
>
>
>
>
> Ruth Thomas-Pellicer
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> "After Nietzsche's devastating criticism of those 'last men' who 'invented
> happiness,' I may leave aside altogether the naïve optimism in which science
> -that is, the technique of mastering life which rests upon science- has been
> celebrated as the way to happiness. Who believes in this? -aside from a few
> big children in university chairs or editorial offices." -Max Weber
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
--
Chetan Vemuri
West Des Moines, IA
aryavartacnsrn@xxxxxxxxx
(515)-418-2771
"You say you want a Revolution! Well you know, we all want to change the
world"