Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:33:18 -0500 From: "Smith, Donald S" <Donald.S.Smith-AT-usa.xerox.com> Subject: RE: Becoming Intellectuals Without Organs Eric wrote: <<<<<<<What if the concept of intellectual did not need to involve a subject at all? How is an intellectual without organs possible? (How do we become Deleuzian without becoming delusional?) Perhaps in Lyotardian terms, an intellectual is an articulation of the impossible phrase, giving voice (silent or otherwise) to feeling; to libidinal desires (even without a set-up). Perhaps the intellectual is simply a becoming; a singularity, not an individual; an event, not a person. Not who is an intellectual, but rather "Is it happening?">>>>>>>> Isn't hegemony the disembodiment of intellectuals? To me, hegemony establishes a Zeitgeist that disguises ideology as common sense. For example when I discuss the disproportionate distribution of wealth with acquaintances they justify it as a part of the natural order of things. They say that to accumulate as much as possible is human nature. They see meritocracy as a natural condition rather than a socially constructed institution. Why do they think this way rather than otherwise? Hegemony! For me the important characteristic of hegemony is the insidious way in which it creates a common sense in the service of power in such subtle ways that the victims participate in their own undoing. I think Foulcault was effective in pointing out the often subtle ways in which discourse forms the subject in the interest of power. Don
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005