Thursday, December 6, 2012
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Friday, November 30, 2012
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Friday, November 16, 2012
A Hopeful Foucaultian?
Foucault undoubtedly makes it very difficult for us to see ourselves as free agents. For us, this is a very scary thing. Not free?? But then, we are just pawns! We have no control! This sense that I have of having a private life and a life completely made up of choices that come from within me is shattered!
But remember when we talked about how scary Sartre's existentialism is? Although that one was scary because of the overwhelming freedom and the consequential overwhelming responsibility, we still found that such responsibility actually meant a huge amount of power--a huge amount of say in how the world takes shape.
Do you think we can find a way in which Foucault's intimidating and seemingly pessimistic philosophy can become a source of hope or inspiration? The thing about Foucault's ideas is that they call to our attention all of the subtle and obvious external causes of our actions that we never really noticed before. So what if we all of a sudden understand ourselves not as free, but as simply the manifestations of our generation's power structures/institution? If, in the process of subjectification, we realize that we are always being subjectified to some sort of power structure but also that those power structures also constitute us as "subjects"--that we are merely vessels through which power structures (like language) manifest themselves. Maybe I am reading too much sociology into this, but basically, aren't those scary structures put in place merely by these people believing themselves to be free to do so? So in a way, don't we have some form of power over how we constitute and act as subjects for that power structure? Of course, it is not the same thing as having freedom--we cannot forget the main point that we cannot conceive of any "episteme" outside of the terms of our own. But...doesn't the realization of this help us become infinitely more invested in our own episteme and looking at concepts critically? Let me know what you think and/or if you can see this or any otehr glimmer of hope in Foucault.
But remember when we talked about how scary Sartre's existentialism is? Although that one was scary because of the overwhelming freedom and the consequential overwhelming responsibility, we still found that such responsibility actually meant a huge amount of power--a huge amount of say in how the world takes shape.
Do you think we can find a way in which Foucault's intimidating and seemingly pessimistic philosophy can become a source of hope or inspiration? The thing about Foucault's ideas is that they call to our attention all of the subtle and obvious external causes of our actions that we never really noticed before. So what if we all of a sudden understand ourselves not as free, but as simply the manifestations of our generation's power structures/institution? If, in the process of subjectification, we realize that we are always being subjectified to some sort of power structure but also that those power structures also constitute us as "subjects"--that we are merely vessels through which power structures (like language) manifest themselves. Maybe I am reading too much sociology into this, but basically, aren't those scary structures put in place merely by these people believing themselves to be free to do so? So in a way, don't we have some form of power over how we constitute and act as subjects for that power structure? Of course, it is not the same thing as having freedom--we cannot forget the main point that we cannot conceive of any "episteme" outside of the terms of our own. But...doesn't the realization of this help us become infinitely more invested in our own episteme and looking at concepts critically? Let me know what you think and/or if you can see this or any otehr glimmer of hope in Foucault.
Today I found myself thinking back to the discussion that we were having in class on Thursday about how little of our life is time that we are not being under surveillance and I realized how true this was for me. The idea that every time we step out the door is a time when we are under surveillance blew my mind (as many of you in class could tell from my gaping mouth facial expression). I have been thinking about how much time I have only to myself in the day and was rather surprised to realize I only have about 30 minutes to an hour of time during the day when I'm awake that I'm not around other people.
I think that the time period we live in now definitely increases the amount of time that we are under surveillance by other people because of things like texting, Facebook and Twitter. Constantly updating and responding to people on these online sites is just more time that we are being surveilled by others. I know I'm not the only one who as soon as class is over pulls out their phone. It's hard not to be a part of things when everyone you know is constantly participating in different activities. I believe that in order to BE a globalized citizen in this modern age is to participate in communication such as texting and Facebook. I'm not saying that it is your duty as a citizen of this age to be on Facebook and Twitter as much as possible but I do think that it is ridiculous when people say that things were better in the old days without cell phones and instant communication. How can you even say that? Technology has brought us a tremendous amount of good and even though that may come with some negative aspects, the good ones certainly outweigh them. However, with all things, I believe that moderation is necessary in order to avoid many of the bad aspects that can come from certain advances.
I think that the time period we live in now definitely increases the amount of time that we are under surveillance by other people because of things like texting, Facebook and Twitter. Constantly updating and responding to people on these online sites is just more time that we are being surveilled by others. I know I'm not the only one who as soon as class is over pulls out their phone. It's hard not to be a part of things when everyone you know is constantly participating in different activities. I believe that in order to BE a globalized citizen in this modern age is to participate in communication such as texting and Facebook. I'm not saying that it is your duty as a citizen of this age to be on Facebook and Twitter as much as possible but I do think that it is ridiculous when people say that things were better in the old days without cell phones and instant communication. How can you even say that? Technology has brought us a tremendous amount of good and even though that may come with some negative aspects, the good ones certainly outweigh them. However, with all things, I believe that moderation is necessary in order to avoid many of the bad aspects that can come from certain advances.
Your Freedom of Thought is Just an Illusion
Throughout the hour and fifteen minute
class period on Tuesday, we struggled to come to terms with the concept that we
are all constantly coerced. However, is this idea so hard to believe?
If we at first ignore Foucault’s theories of
epistemes and power/knowledge, solely observing this phenomenon from a psychological
approach, it is at least evident that we are influenced by our respective
environments. The primary example of this is that of a child. It learns its behavioral
patterns from whom and what it experiences, remaining ignorant of other
information unless it is introduced to it either directly or indirectly. For example,
if it had never seen, read, or heard about an elephant, it would not be able to
comprehend the idea of an elephant. Similarly to this, even as an adult, one is
only able to understand what one knows. If you are never introduced to the concept
of communism, then you would never know what it is.
On the other hand, previous knowledge can
affect how you perceive new information, as well. As citizens of the United
States of America, we are instilled with the idea that communism is bad before
we even fully understand what it is, because we are taught that communism is a
threat to our democracy. However, if you were to take a citizen from Poland
from before the cold war, the situation would be completely different. The idea
of communism would be introduced as a force that could give rise to better modes
of living.
And thus the coercion becomes more evident.
The episteme that we find ourselves immersed in is what defines what we are. It
not only affects our behavioral patterns, such as the way we position ourselves
and the manner in which we talk, but it also affects the way we think and what
we think. If the episteme is altered,
then we are altered as well. Foucault deviates from the enlightenment ideal of
the individual as the generator of force in favor of the idea that the force is
what generates the individual (or the forces of said individual).
Honestly, guys, Foucault is bringing me down. Even though his claims make sense and at the moment seem indisputable, I would definitely prefer to agree with Sartre’s enlightenment mode of thought. But, unfortunately, in the eyes of Foucault the self-deceptive idea of freedom of thought only gives rise to more affective docility, and I would prefer not to give him that satisfaction. I’ve found myself in between a rock and a hard place, and the only solution is more Foucault. What do you guys think? Is there a way to debunk the idea of knowledge/power? Is any way to create room for the individual or are we all just doomed to be influenced without our own true individuality?
Honestly, guys, Foucault is bringing me down. Even though his claims make sense and at the moment seem indisputable, I would definitely prefer to agree with Sartre’s enlightenment mode of thought. But, unfortunately, in the eyes of Foucault the self-deceptive idea of freedom of thought only gives rise to more affective docility, and I would prefer not to give him that satisfaction. I’ve found myself in between a rock and a hard place, and the only solution is more Foucault. What do you guys think? Is there a way to debunk the idea of knowledge/power? Is any way to create room for the individual or are we all just doomed to be influenced without our own true individuality?
Also, in response to Chandler’s blog from last
week:
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7b1soBg821qcu0j0o1_500.jpg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)