From: atefeho-AT-vms2.macc.wisc.edu Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 05:16:09 -0500 Subject: Re: What??? or: Foucault is a Kantian Foucault, post-modern? What is postmodernism to begin with? Secondly, in 1984, F. was stuck with the baudelairian idea of dandy(ism)"!!! Is this enough provocation? Atefeh At , foucault-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU wrote: >At 04:18 PM 10/20/96 -0500, Omar Nasim wrote: >>On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, Stephen D'Arcy wrote: >> >>> Discussion on this list has to be provoked. There is a simple >>> technique. You begin with a controversial claim, like "Foucault is a >>> Marxist," or "Foucault is a conservative," or "Foucault is a liberal." >>> Then you supply an argument, or a quotation, to justify your claim. >>> And then you encourage people who disagree to try to convince you that >>> you are mistaken. >> >> >>Thankyou for your adivice, but you forgot another aspect of >>dialoge, agreement. What i am about to do with your next paragraph, i.e. >>agree with it. >> >>> Speaking of controversial interpretations of Foucault: I think >>> Foucault is so far from being a "post-modernist" that he has much more >>> in common with Immanuel Kant than he does with, say, Lyotard or >>> Derrida (not that I would admit that Derrida is a postmodernist). >>> >>> I don't have time to justify this, but perhaps those who have read >>> Foucault's "What is Enlightenment?," or, say, Ian Hacking's >>> "Self-improvement" (in FOUCAULT: A CRITICAL READER), can anticipate >>> the sort of justification I would give. >>> >>> I'm really curious: what is it about Foucault that makes him something >>> other than a characteristically "modern" thinker? >>> >>> Steve >> >>I would tend to agree with your asseration, that Foucault is more Kantian >>than lyotardean or derridean. I read "What is Englightment", and your >>right, Foucault's position seems to me, that of a Kantian postion, in >>that he is a strong exponent of aesthetics and progressive change through >>art, where, he believes, is the only way to trascend the power/knowledge >>schemes, he's soo fond of. That is, instead of being anti-aesthetical, a >>post-modern position, he asserts the neccessity of aesthetics, just as >>Kant did. Being aesthetical as opposed to Anti-aesthetical, I feel that >>Foucault still beliefs in the good ole values of judgement, and therefore >>Truth, With MEANING!!! therefore, depth. >>Omar Nasim >>Department of Philosophy, >>University of Manitoba >> >> >> Az Khak Bar'amadim-o- Bar Khak Shodym
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005