+
From: Erik Hoogcarspel <jehms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
+
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:39:58 +0200
sissy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 09/23/00 13:27:28 you wrote:
>
> >Frankly, it is not clear to me how one can argue the silencing of one group
> >in favor of another after reading Foucault--or perhaps I am misreading your
> >post?
>
> I have a question (probably rather stupid for this group) regarding this question,
> which I have heard posed and argued about and that tends create in my experience
> divisions that lay in postions of certian discourses.Isn't this question rooted in
> notions of freedom of speech (freedom, rights and feelings) and poistions in
> relationship to power? What questions can folks ask about this question as it
> relates to Focualt is what I'd be interested in.
I think it's even worse, it's a full proof sofism. I call it an argument of power.
They used it against Socrates. If Foucault is wrong it's because his arguments don't
add up, not because his ideas could have unwanted consequences. It's like saying Marx
is wrong because otherwise there will be a revolution or Schopenhauer is wrong because
otherwise life is not nice anymore.
erik