Subject: Re: wittgenstein, lyotard, foucault
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 23:28:21 PST


Dear Matt

thanks for the great message.  What you said reminds me of something 
Wittgenstein wrote about the value of fictional ideas and arguments in 
working on real problems.  A big part of good philosophy for me is 
fictionalising and rhetorical argument.   And, as Wittgenstein also 
says, jokes.

>He isn't describing things as they "really
>are" (again I think that distinction between the way things really are 
and
>a figurative reading of them is problematized already).  He's offering 
a
>possible reading, a possible departure point for the rise of various 
forms
>of control (and any departure point would be arbitrary).  What do you
>think? 

I do think that Foucault's books are difficult to come to terms with 
within the regular frames of reference (like real and figurative).  And, 
as he himself was willing to suggest, his work is as much a part of 
power structures as anything else. However, this doesn't make them 
impotent, I don't think.  The very contingency of his 'histories' is a 
way of offering alternatives, as well as owning up to the fact that all 
we ever have is 'versions' (the ghost of Neitzche again).

Now, would I be right in saying that this kind of theorising has an 
influence on differends?  - it seems to me that in fragmenting 
'official' versions of events and viewpoints, new possibilities emerge.
Am I being too optimistic here?!

Jon Roffe

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com