Dear Glen and others,
Thanks for the references. Zizek is good on revolution (notwithstanding the shortcomings etc). I am rather looking for clues as to relationship between the concept of revoluiton and spirituality in Foucault. So it would be particularly enlightening if someone could shed some light on passages like this (or provide a reference to philosophical disucssion of the same):
"“Spirituality
postulates that the truth is never given to the subject by right. Spirituality
postulates that the subject as such does not have right to access to the truth
and is not capable of access to the truth. It postulates that the truth is not
given to the subject by a simple act of knowledge (connaissance), which would
be founded and justified simply by the fact that he is the subject and because
he possesses this or that structure of subjectivity. It postulates that for the
subject to have right of access to the truth he must be changed, transformed,
shifted, and become to some extent and up to certain point, other than himself.
The truth is only given to the subject at a price that brings the subject’s
being into play. For as he is, the subject is not capable of truth. I think
that this is the simplest but most fundamental formula by which spirituality
can be defined.”
What's clear to me at this point is that
the notion of spirituality is closely tied to both Focualt's critique of the
subject and the possibility of a totally new subjectivity. What I am wondering
at the moment is how this relates to his views on revolution in a way which is
more than just pointing towards the general structural similarities which one
can see between "subjective" transformation and revolutionary
transformation.Ali
Thanks for the references. Zizek is good on revolution (notwithstanding the shortcomings etc). I am rather looking for clues as to relationship between the concept of revoluiton and spirituality in Foucault. So it would be particularly enlightening if someone could shed some light on passages like this (or provide a reference to philosophical disucssion of the same):
"“Spirituality
postulates that the truth is never given to the subject by right. Spirituality
postulates that the subject as such does not have right to access to the truth
and is not capable of access to the truth. It postulates that the truth is not
given to the subject by a simple act of knowledge (connaissance), which would
be founded and justified simply by the fact that he is the subject and because
he possesses this or that structure of subjectivity. It postulates that for the
subject to have right of access to the truth he must be changed, transformed,
shifted, and become to some extent and up to certain point, other than himself.
The truth is only given to the subject at a price that brings the subject’s
being into play. For as he is, the subject is not capable of truth. I think
that this is the simplest but most fundamental formula by which spirituality
can be defined.”
What's clear to me at this point is that
the notion of spirituality is closely tied to both Focualt's critique of the
subject and the possibility of a totally new subjectivity. What I am wondering
at the moment is how this relates to his views on revolution in a way which is
more than just pointing towards the general structural similarities which one
can see between "subjective" transformation and revolutionary
transformation.Ali