File spoon-archives/foucault.archive/foucault_1996/f_Jan21.96, message 33


Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 15:59:46 +1100
From: bpalmer-AT-pcug.org.au (Bryan Palmer)
Subject: Re: Poststructuralism & Ethics


Dirk said. . . 

>We've  heard much about "doing" that is not "doing in a conservative 
>sense", "effects" that are not "effects in a traditional sense" and 
>"actions" that are "actions in adifferent sense". Obviously ethics 
>has got to do with acting, and therefore the question of action and 
>effect can not be neglected by post-structuralist ethics.

It sometimes sounds as if the Emperor has no clothes.  (Or are they just
differnt clothes that you can't see?)

>On the other hand, following MF, the main effects in society are not 
>provoked by acting individuals but by "enonces", that influence each 
>other in the field of discourse and for these effects  noone can be held 
>responsible.Not only what is uttered and what not, even what happens 
>and what not seems to be dependent on anonymous "enonces" and the 
>order of discourse.
>
>So my questions are: "Is there any notion of 'responsibility' in ps and 
>on what basis?"

Good question.  Also is there a difference between personal and collective
responsibility?  And if so, on what basis?

>and "What are the characteristics of the alternative 
>concepts of 'acting' and 'effect' (other than being different)?" 

Another good question.

>(most of the glorious effects of ps that were mentioned yet are 
>intra-academic and accompanied by no relevant social change at all).

So far, I have heard no one provide a constuctive answer concerning my
question of action. 

_______________________________________________________________
Bryan Palmer
bpalmer-AT-pcug.org.au
Canberra - Australia's National Capital


     ------------------

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005