Subject: Re: Foucault and Lyotard
Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 16:30:07 PDT


a long time ago, Hugh wrote:

> In this context, I think of Rorty, Barrett, and Lyotard,
> who wrote books (not many) that went beyond name-dropping
> and explaining what a voice from the past "really meant".
> 
> They became, perhaps, "specific intellectuals", interested
> in "ideas".

After some time, Hugh, I've made it back to this post of yours.

The notion of specific intellectual I think has a more programmatic 
meaning than this, at least on my reading of what Foucault says about 
it.  A specific intellectual is someone who deals with localised 
questions.  It involves the rejection of both the idea of the general 
reality (or the general activity of power) and the position of 
intellectual-as-superhero.

In my mind, the SI is the only model of engaged thought and thinker 
which seems promising and avoids falling into too many enlightenment 
traps.

Lyotard has importance for me particularly with regard to his notion of 
differend, because this seems a tool, an analytic perspective, a way of 
ordering things, that provides a way forward, a way out of impasses of 
thought.  Much like Derrida's 'differance'.  These tools, organising 
themes, are able to be used in specific, localised philosophical 
activities.

 > I don't understand "microphilosophy".  Scientists immersed
> in "reductionist" theories seem to chop matter into finer and
> finer bits until it becomes indescribable - maybe just a
> prejudice.

I can see how you might make this reading of it, sure.  The influence of 
Deleuze/Guattari, this term. 'microphilosophy' is my attempt to find a 
way of describing the activity of the specific intellectual; to focus on 
a small area of discourse, a certain manifestation of architecture, a 
habit of language in a workplace, a way of ordering books in a library, 
the use by Plato of one word rather than another.  This seems to me the 
most fruitful kind of investigations - the small scaled ones (an attempt 
to keep grand narrative deflated).  I look to Deleuze, Wittgenstein and 
Derrida myself to outline this kind of work for myself.

Thanks for your thoughts, Hugh, and your graciousness on this list

~Jon Roffe

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com