I'm fascinated with epistemology, so, to me, the crux of Foucault's work is in the notion that there is a "politics of truth" (to quote the title of a posthumous collection of Foucault essays)--that what we know is dependent on history and social/cultural forces.
What is his work about to you?
posted by:
|
Unsubscribed |
-
Re: What does Foucault mean to you?
Sat, July 2, 2005 - 6:12 PMWow ... I'm just a surface admirer. There are two things about Foucault that resonate with me:
1. His theory of Social Construct
2. His work around the way we are taught to view sex and sexuality.
-
Re: What does Foucault mean to you?
Sun, July 3, 2005 - 2:54 AMI have many things that I both like and dislike about Foucault. One of my biggest frustrations is that he suffers (like many existential / post-existential philosophers) from constructing elaborate juxtipositions of phrases - describing himself as an "archeologist" of power to labeling social ills as a "politics of truth." Similar to the evolution of the concept of a DASEIN. In their essence, these views of the world suffer from a great deal of subjectivity. Just as Nitzche argued that Plato's understanding of the Unvierse only applys to Plato, since Plato is truly the only one who can understand the world according to Plato, so does Foucault suffer interpritation by other budding armchair philosophers.
Foucault is provocative. I'll give him that. He, like many Philosophers - still hasn't solved anything... he merely presents more problems Yet his observations continue to have poineint meaning in today's world. -
-
Re: What does Foucault mean to you?
Sun, July 3, 2005 - 5:29 PMHuH??
I ... guess ... only you can then understand your .... "logic"? (smile) Sorry ... it was over the plate. Don't mean to really be insulting.
But I must admit that I don't follow your reasoning. Am I wrong ... but are you saying that you have to "BELIVE ALL" that a thinker or philosopher says for him or her to have any value to you?
To some degree, I look at philosophers much like I do artist and writers. "The duty of art is to show the possibilities of life to the viewer."
When you look at a painting in a museum, you don't say ... "I don't know if Van Gogh fully convinced me that THAT is a flower" ... no ... you see how light looked to him through HIS eyes ... and when next you are out and about on a sunny day, you recall his flowers and your life is enriched just a bit more than it would have been had you never seen a Van Gogh.
So with thinkers ... I don't have to believe EVERYTHING they put forth for them to have value to me ... it's just that they've made me think ... more.... about what I truly believe ... and for that, I am most often ... thankful. -
-
Re: What does Foucault mean to you?
Mon, July 4, 2005 - 12:37 AMI think my argument stems from my belief that truth is relative, and many philosophers pontificate as if their view of the universe is the be-all-end-all of understanding. What we understand today, often changes tomorrow.
I believe Foucault suffers from this from time to time as well. Plato, Foucault, and every other philosopher has a relative view of the universe. True (or should we say "ideal") objectivity doesn't exist. I realise that a "total" understanding of philosophy is impossible. And I think that it is a valid argument - we can never fully understand or share the complete conciousness or perception of others. While this strengthens the foundations for Foucaults observations in dealing with master-slave relationships, power constructs, the panopticion, clinic and asylum, etc. I think that his philosophy is more social commentary than a method to solve the problems of a modern world. He is extremely observant but doesn't try to find answers - which is a drastic departure from many of history's great thinkers.
Does this mean that his or any other's philosophy is useless? I don't think so. But it does dampen the objectivity and usefulness of philosophy. I think philosophy can only address questions metaphisically until science takes over, and even then its not truly objective, nor does it give us a complete understanding of the universe. Philosophy still plays a major role many aspects of modern life. Many of the questions asked by the likes of Descartes, Newton, etc. have formed modern science and many of their questions remain unanswered today. Philosophy does add another fascet to the looking glass through which we view (to comment on your flower observation.) However to say that we understand the Universe according to Einstein or Foucault is not really an accurate statemet. We only understand fractions of their view. And this DOES lessen its ability to convey meaning and have utility in a society. Over time, all views become dilluted.
I am the first to admit that my logic is not always the best. But I am well read. ;) I think we are agreeing. Feel free to disagree.
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: What does Foucault mean to you?
Thu, July 7, 2005 - 11:35 PMI remember the first time I read Foucault. After trudging through the History of Sexuality, Vol.1 I was really excited, stimulated and happy to "finally" be reading a book on sexuality that didn't just blindly praise the coming out process. That was my entree into, dare I say, "post-whatever" critical theory. I had read Marx and Sartre and little Nietzsche and had been a labor activist for a long time. I remember how, upon further reading of Foucault's work, my faith in Marxist dogma was ultimately shattered and I was challenged to think deeper into social problems. In a way, reading Foucault has inspired my desire to do doctoral studies in social theory. Of course his writing is very problematic, especially for women and those of us outside of France, but I strongly believe in gathering wisdom and insight from as many sources as possible so I count Foucault as one of the most important Western philosophers for me as a scholar and an activist.
