Re: [Foucault-L] Foucault, correspondence theory vs coherence theory

Hi Chetan I think Ian Hacking's 'style of reasoning' can help you-although hailing from an analytic tradition Hacking has great insight into the 'positivism' qua historical ontology of MF

> Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 20:53:50 -0700
> From: ali_m_rizvi@xxxxxxxxx
> To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Foucault, correspondence theory vs coherence theory
>
> Hi Chetan,
> To the extent that we can understand Focuault's major works (at least until OT) as exploring the historical conditions of the possibility
> of certain discourses, practices, etc, his inquiry is more about "meaning" and hence more fundamental (prior) to the question of truth. We can raise
>
> the question of truth only about statements which are meaningful (the statements we understand). Although, admittedly the question of truth can be raised not just about a single or groups of statements, but also about an entire episteme, in which case I think, both coherence and reference has a role to play, but I don't think Foucault ever worried about such questions himself.
>
> Ali
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Chetan Vemuri <aryavartacnsrn@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Mailing-list <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2011 11:28 AM
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Foucault, correspondence theory vs coherence theory
>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list