[lbo-talk] Butler

[Eubulides]

Ted Winslow wrote:
> Doug Henwood wrote:
> 
>> On Jun 7, 2008, at 3:38 PM, shag quoted JB:
>>
>>> I am not doing away with the category, but trying to relieve the
>>> category
>>> of its foundatiohalist weight in order to render it as a site of
>>> permanent
>>> political contest.
>> That's pretty great. How can anyone resist its charms?
>>
> 
> It implicitly assumes, doesn't it,  that all "knowledge" claims in the  
> sense of claims that rational "foundations" exist for belief must be,  
> as Foucault puts it,  “aspects of the will to knowledge,” of a   
> “rancourous”, “malicious”, “murderous” “instinct for knowledge” that   
> Foucault identifies with “violence” and “the inquisitor’s devotion,  
> cruel  subtlety, and malice"?  If it does, how come you can't "resist  
> its charms"?

===============

Of course, Foucault could be merely wrong regarding the "will to 
knowledge", perhaps a bit carried away with the hermeneutics of 
suspicion.....a little to much hashish while spending so much time alone 
writing..........perhaps?

What's the difference between "knowledge" and knowledge?

Ian