I don't think he fits the terms of that debate
I would suggest Susan Hekman's recent introduction to this topic, The Material of Knowledge: Feminist Disclosures (Indiana University Press, 2010) as the place to start for an overview
http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1037_1100&products_id=562740
On 06/04/2011, at 12:58 PM, Chetan Vemuri wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I was talking with a friend who is a grad student in analytic
> philosophy and we were debating about the issue of "truth" in both
> analytic and continental traditions. In the course of it, we came to a
> discussion of the merits of the correspondence theory of truth versus
> the coherence theory of truth. The former argues for the veracity of a
> statement to be tied to its referent empirical reality and how well it
> "describes" or "corresponds" to it (straightforward "truth"). The
> latter tying veracity to a statement's relationship to other
> connecting statements. Where exactly would Foucault fit between these
> two theories? Going by the Archaeology of Knowledge, I would say he
> criscrosses the divide (though more accurately he could be described
> as being Nietzschean about truth). But are there any analytically or
> partly analytically trained people on here that might provide their
> own views?
>
> --
> Chetan Vemuri
> West Des Moines, IA
> aryavartacnsrn@xxxxxxxxx
> (319)-512-9318
> "You say you want a Revolution! Well you know, we all want to change the world"
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
I would suggest Susan Hekman's recent introduction to this topic, The Material of Knowledge: Feminist Disclosures (Indiana University Press, 2010) as the place to start for an overview
http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1037_1100&products_id=562740
On 06/04/2011, at 12:58 PM, Chetan Vemuri wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I was talking with a friend who is a grad student in analytic
> philosophy and we were debating about the issue of "truth" in both
> analytic and continental traditions. In the course of it, we came to a
> discussion of the merits of the correspondence theory of truth versus
> the coherence theory of truth. The former argues for the veracity of a
> statement to be tied to its referent empirical reality and how well it
> "describes" or "corresponds" to it (straightforward "truth"). The
> latter tying veracity to a statement's relationship to other
> connecting statements. Where exactly would Foucault fit between these
> two theories? Going by the Archaeology of Knowledge, I would say he
> criscrosses the divide (though more accurately he could be described
> as being Nietzschean about truth). But are there any analytically or
> partly analytically trained people on here that might provide their
> own views?
>
> --
> Chetan Vemuri
> West Des Moines, IA
> aryavartacnsrn@xxxxxxxxx
> (319)-512-9318
> "You say you want a Revolution! Well you know, we all want to change the world"
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list