Kelley writes:
[-To ponder, while about sociology, science I think the basic points
can be applied to aesthetic theory:
"The postmodernist turn seriously challenges the very identity of sociology because it calls into question the very meaning of science. However, the ways in which the debate has been portrayed is seriously misleading for it is posed in terms of a Gran Either/Or: Either sociology is a science or it is not. To the question in such dramatic terms, however, leads to a cul-de-sac: Neither position ultimately questions the fundamental character of science as it has been conventionally understtod; each takes for granted the primacy of a postivist conception of science. While there are many facets of positivist which are open to critique, here I shall focus on that aspect of positivism which requires that adequate scientific theory be disengaged from the ethical-political horizons of the public sphere....The postmodernist challenge demands that sociology alter its self-identity. Tkaing this challenge seriously does not merely demand that we redefine the relationship between theoretical and empirical work. What is required is a a redefinition of the relationship between science and the public, political sphere....
Sociology does not and cannot possess knowledge. Scoiology as 'poiesis' is a means or a bringing forth of meaning and knowledge which it cannot posessess but must relinquish to the realm of public truth. The adequacy of sociological theory must be <bold>brought forth</bold> to the public domain where sociological knowledge is rendered more meaningful through the development of wisdom, understanding, and, perhaps more importantly, practical intelligence. And practical intelligence, as Aristotle maintained, 'is a state of grasping the truth...,involving reason, concerned w/ action (praxis) about what is good or bad for human beings.'"
"Science is the search for truth, but such truth is not some essential, irreducible reality. Instead, the knowledge that we acquire alters the *meaning* it has for us. That is, knowledge alters our activities, our praxis, the uses to which we put that knowledge. Knowledge is a * means* to action; it is a re-leasing of potentialities. To use a simple analogy, clay may seem merely a lump of muddy earth. Yet, humans transform it into a brick, a simple pitcher, or an ornate vase. A brick-maker or potter *knows* and releases the meanings of clay through their use and thus their knowledge of it. The socio-natural world is an objective reality, but human reflection is always secondary and mediated. Human knowledge of the social world always involves and demands reference to meaning. All investigations of the social world--those aspects of experience that people create--are inextricably concerned with, not only scientific truths and meanings, but also aesthetic and moral meanings, potentialities and uses."] -------------------
CB: Here Butler ( I think Butler is quoted) sounds like she is putting forth the same epistemology that Marx does in the 1st, 2nd and 11th Theses on Feuerbach. "Engaging the moral/political horizons of the public sphere" could be interpreted as practice or practical-critical ( revolutionary) activity. I'm starting to think Butler is an undercover materialist.
The Theses on Feuerbach are a critique of positivist science too. They call for science as a unity of theory and practice. Doesn't Butler do that in this quote ?
The following sentence seems like a theses on feuerbach thought with its emphasis on "_practical_ intelligence"
"The adequacy of sociological theory must be <bold>brought forth</bold> to the public domain where sociological knowledge is rendered more meaningful through the development of wisdom, understanding, and, perhaps more importantly, practical intelligence."And practical intelligence, as Aristotle maintained, 'is a state of grasping the truth...,involving reason, concerned w/ action (praxis) about what is good or bad for human beings.'"
^^^
"Moral meaning" can be thought of as "ethical meaning. and ethics has to do with what people _do_. Doing is practice. The unity of science and morality is the unity of theory and practice.
The aesthetic dimension impacts on what attracts and inspires people to act, which is another word for practice. "Art" has a connotation of "practice", in the sense of "how to properly do" something.
One explanation of her not openly declaring so, besides the obvious anti-Marxism of US academe, is the publish or perish rule. Professors have to publish original material. They can't just be copycats, and reiterate some other doctrine, with little creativity. This would explain Butler using so much original language and syntax, too.
This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com