Date: Fri, 30 Sep 94 22:26 BST From: WIDDER-AT-VAX.LSE.AC.UK To: FOUCAULT%COM.STD.WORLD-AT-LSE.AC.UK Subject: RE: Performative contradiction. The performative contradiction is, among other people's, Habermas's favorite weapon against Foucault, Derrida, et al. I don't want to respond extensively to it, at least at the moment. But I think it's important to see how much this sort of criticism depends on where one starts. If one starts with the premise that there's no such thing as truth, or everything is interpretation, or everything is false, etc., the question automatically arises "well, how can you claim the 'truth' that 'everything is false'?" Alternatively, if the claim that 'truth is a fiction' is a conclusion, the last or at least a later part of an inquiry or critique, then it might be possible to draw certain claims or affirmations from the very journey undertaken in the process of making this critique. The real question, then, is whether Foucault's attack on the will to truth puts truth into doubt at the beginning, as a premise, or as a conclusion. I seriously doubt much of a case can be made for the first possibility -- that it is a presupposition or starting point. In terms of Gramsci's concept of hegemony, it might be useful to look at Laclau and Mouffe's HEGEMONY AND SOCIALIST STRATEGY. It doesn't necessarily relate Gramsci to Foucault (except marginally, it's more of a Derridian text in many of its orientations), but it is a good work. Nathan widder-AT-vax.lse.ac.uk
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005