- oscarthewilde
- May 16, 2012
-
I would often go there
To the tiny church there
|
For example, say we read someone say "The police will only ever protect the wealthy, the justice system is only used to protect those in power". You can read that about 50 times a day on here.
There are two ways to interpret that. The first is that there are universal moral and ethical laws, that people can learn and understand through discourse, but that presently, law enforcement and courts do not follow laws derived from those principles. That would be the rationalist, enlightenment take.
The second way to interpret that is the Foucault way, that is derived from Heidegger, that "universal moral and ethical laws" are just masks for the exercise of power, a form of disguising what can't even be called Truth anymore, a continuation of "forgetting" our primal truth and that, in effect 
Because on the surface these arguments might say the same thing, but they start from different places and have different ends. With the first one, we can at least theoretically talk about what a just society looks like. With the second, we are just left posting disconnected discontent on an internet comedy forum.
I'm not entirely sure I agree with your conclusions there. While the post-structuralist writers do indeed deconstruct anything they can get their hands on and, one could argue, the entire post-structruralist/post-modernist project is in its own a reaction to the modernist project of actually theorising and proposing a better world by critique , post-structuralism can and does actually propose something better. Not in the sense of the promised, though slightly unexplained, clear world of communism, but a better world or society nonetheless.
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2019 00:16
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2024 12:03
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2019 00:16
