Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 12:16:20 -0500
Subject: Re: Objectivity and Ideology


>On Fri, 6 Mar 1998 19:45:21 -0500  Ostrow/Kaneda wrote:
>
>> >Does anyone else think this is reductionist or is it just me?
>>> ken
>
>> Remember the question that this was in response to -- and
>the context  -- the dynamic of subjectivity and objectivity.
>
>Yes but this dynamic is one of emancipation AND domination.
> So reducing relationships to the will to power eliminates the
>possibility of the tension being emancipatory... (in a
>noncoercive sense).
>
>ken

The ( dialectic) tension you require is an ideological
(humanist)determination - representing imagined contradictory
relationships between entities  necessay for their determination-- if taken
from that realm and placed within  discursive one   F.M. and N.'s  relation
to the  "will to power" (which granted is a fear reflex ie.  a desire for
control or dominance) might make or take as its objective  politically,
philosophically or psychologically the respective  goals of freeing one's
class, one's subject or oneself from the very  fear  that provokes the
desire for control and thus the illusionary goal of emancipation.  This
dynamic may  be thought of as emancipatory- given the fear in this case is
thought of as  coercive --  The question here is once of subjectivity and
identity--  to what extremes  morally, ethically or legally does one go to
quelll the fear -- does one access the claim of a greater good to curtail
those who stand between you and your emancipation or does one sacrifice
self interests also in the name of the greater good -- this seems to have
been Martin H.'s conflict when it came to the question of implementing his
vision of Being. The imagined  when acted upon never behaves like one
imagines it should.