> Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>
> >Why then Foucault's fight againt Marxism?
>
> He had his disagreements with Marxism, but he frequently expressed
> his debt to the Old Man, too. To wax Bloomian for a minute, I think
> he had a real anxiety of influence issue.
>
> And so what? So what if MF didn't meet the Marxian purity assay?
> Doesn't he deserve being taken seriously anyway? There aren't many
> writers of the last century in his league as both thinker and
stylist.
>
> Doug
==========
"After all, what would be the value of the passion for knowledge if it
resulted only in a certain amount of knowledgeableness and not, in one
way or another and to the extent possible, in the knower's straying
afield of himself? There are times in life when the question of
knowing if one can think differently than one thinks, and perceive
differently than one sees, is absolutely necessary if one is to go on
looking and reflecting at all. People will say, perhaps, that these
games with oneself would better be left backstage; or, at best, that
they might properly form part of those preliminary exercises that are
forgotten once they have served their purpose. But, then, what is
philosophy today--philosophical activity, I mean--if it is not the
critical work that thought brings to bear on itself? In what does it
consist, if not in the endeavor to know how and to what extent it
might be possible to think differently, instead of legitimating what
is already known?" [MF--"The Use of Pleasure"]
