Term two, week three. Sarah, Foucault.

A History of Sexuality.

“If we ‘work on ourselves’, to what extent can we assume we do so outside particular logics of power?”

“-Definition of term ‘logics of power’?”

I have searched this but found no corresponding results, apart from -perhaps-  information regarding Tautology, which is about logic but I believe it to be irrelevant here.

This session made me think, and is now making me think again, about the idea of observing one ‘training themselves’ almost, although I think that word implies too much intensity, but I think this observation of subconscious, acted out change in oneself could be a very intense moment. I feel this could be conscious, but is mostly sub-conscious, but this will depend upon the person; who and how they are.

“Need the tools to think about certain things, or in certain ways,”-how do we come across these tools? by confirmation from one another perhaps, progress.- “or by a certain system.” How would we live without this system we live in? If we didn’t have ‘this system’ would progress be suppressed? Or could we progress in another way?

Huxley, in doors of perception, heaven and hell, speaks about an underlying system to everything, even though we perceive it as random and sporadic, and I think this could relate to that, progression is underlying regardless of the way we schedule and observe it.

“How does Foucault’s, ‘The Subject and Power’ (1982), help us to think about (or rethink) identity?” I found Foucault to strongly centre around hardships, struggle, concentration of power. He creates very simplistic, ‘native’ questions, prosaic almost, and -to me- the bigger picture. “What am I? What are we? Who am I? Who are we?”

WHAT- self cognitive neuro-science, evolution

WHO- affected by experience interactions

How do these above things change, grow and/or revolutionize during our existence? I believe by a combination of both of the above descriptions of ‘WHAT’ and ‘WHO’.

“What is considered as ‘natural’ in society? (Influence). What can we observe when we remove society from action or thought? Peer pressure. Expectations. Perception of the law being ‘this is morally wrong’ —> Normality? What are the means by which power is brought into being? What are the tools needed for power? This session again brought me to the idea of I and WE, like last week. It also connects to Mike’s week (#1) regarding the idea of capital and power.

2 thoughts on “Term two, week three. Sarah, Foucault.

  1. “Working on oneself”……….the corresponding term for Gurdjieff would be “Self Remembering”. The very act of being involved in this process is to aim for consciousness. In such a realm it could be argued particular logics of power do not have influence. All forms of influence sway people if they remain “asleep”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *