Re: [Foucault-L] Foucault v. Web 2.0

It seems our contemporary status of inundation by  technological mediation is yet another  compelling, even seductive, nearly uncompromising  layer of the 'apparatus.' See Giorgio Agamben's recent text on Foucault's concept. 
Then sit down with someone, maybe two or three people, and have a conversation about this with them. notice the difference between that conversation and ours here...

--- On Fri, 5/28/10, Douglas Olena <doug@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Douglas Olena <doug@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Foucault v. Web 2.0
To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, May 28, 2010, 1:15 PM

Foucault did not think about the future the way some do.  In Ethics Subjectivity and Truth, p.  211-12 He describes stultitia as an unproductive state of mind that looks toward the future, preventing it ‘from providing a fixed point for itself in the possession of an acquired truth.’ I think the sense here is that hupomnemata through a grounding in useful principles prevents worry about the future.  In Hermeneutics of the Subject p. 465 Thinking about the future is futile because it obscures the present.  More about the stultus there as well.


Douglas Olena
417-887-0332 h
417-988-4337 c

On May 28, 2010, at 3:51 AM, Chathan Vemuri wrote:

> I guess that was what he meant by being a non-universal intellectual. 
> Could not be expected to comment on everything.
> But then again, given the impact the television had on the marketing 
> of philosophy to the French public during the 60's and 70's, I would 
> think he would eventually have something to say. Odd.
> But yes, we can go on without him on talking about this.
> On May 28, 2010, at 3:42 AM, peter chamberlain wrote:
>> Mark Poster has a piece on itunesu, foucault  deleuze and the new 
>> media. he
>> believes foucault never referred to computers, or perhaps only once, 
>> and
>> that in general foucault was silent with regards to the media. but 
>> he also
>> seems to believe this silence can be filled in. to be honest i'm not 
>> sure
>> why foucault would have been expect to foresee the impact of the new 
>> tech -
>> he was also relatively silent on feminism and post colonialism, but 
>> one
>> could assume the nature of a tool box is that it has multiple 
>> functions.
>> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Erik Hoogcarspel <jehms@xxxxxxxxx> 
>> wrote:
>>> But something was going on, there was the Spectrum, the Commodore 64,
>>> the Sinclair QL and even the first Amiga and Atari computers and the
>>> Apple. People held high hopes for the future. The implications of
>>> communication networks were not yet discusses, but the automatisation
>>> and the processing of data by computers was already an item. Perhaps
>>> Foucault didn't foresee the far reaching consequences of the oncoming
>>> technology.
>>> erik
>>> Op 27-05-10 23:37, David McInerney schreef:
>>>> Given when he died I imagine there wasn't much to say.
>>>> Back in 1984 people were still getting excited over the new AT MS-
>>>> DOS
>>>> machines with two 5.25" floppy disks and even in 1987 I was informed
>>>> in hushed tones as a new employee about the amazing 20MB hard drive
>>>> that the big insurance company I worked for had installed and which
>>>> they were hoping to eventually scan and store all of the insurance
>>>> policies on!  Even in 1994 the internet was a huge deal and only a
>>>> few people I knew had access to it, generally academics using
>>>> university infrastructure.  I didn't know any undergrad students who
>>>> had used it.
>>>> Back in 1984 it was people posting modem addresses in magazines and
>>>> communicating one-to-one as far as I can remember.
>>>> So no I wouldn't expect anything in Foucault's work itself, but I'd
>>>> be interested to see what people have done with his work since to
>>>> discuss the matter
>>>> D
>>>> On 28/05/2010, at 6:53 AM, Thomas Lord wrote:
>>>>> Did Foucault write anything about computing,
>>>>> software, networking, and so forth?   His mode
>>>>> of analysis seems to have a lot of relevance
>>>>> to today's Internet but I'm wondering what he
>>>>> might have written directly about such technology.
>>>>> -t
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Foucault-L mailing list
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foucault-L mailing list
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foucault-L mailing list
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foucault-L mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list

Foucault-L mailing list

Re: [Foucault-L] Foucault v. Web 2.0, Douglas Olena
Partial thread listing: