As already mentioned, the language in the episteme of the nineteenth century transformed from transparent facilitator of thinking and views in the object of knowledge with its own Genesis and history. This loss of language a privileged place in the space of thinking is filled several ways. First, the pathos of the positivist dream of a perfect logical purified from the accidents of everyday use the language of science; second, the restoration of the "critical" value of language learning, it a special role in the art of understanding texts; third, the emergence of literature in the narrow and proper sense of the word, reviving the language in its "intransitive", being self-closed. For modern thinking the most important scope of the language is the interpretation and formalization, or otherwise, identifying that , in fact, spoken language, and that all it might be said. The limit of interpretation-a clash with the the unconscious, which is not expressible in any language (Freud and the phenomenology). The limit of formalization -- the pure forms of thinking, devoid of language shell and translucent in its logical structure (Russell and structuralism). And here, says Foucault, archaeological soil both answers, despite their outward opposite one. But the most characteristic feature of modern episteme is, according to Foucault, her attitude to the man.
1 comment:
As already mentioned, the language in the episteme of the nineteenth century transformed from
transparent facilitator of thinking and views in the object of knowledge
with its own Genesis and history. This loss of language
a privileged place in the space of thinking is filled several
ways. First, the pathos of the positivist dream of a perfect logical
purified from the accidents of everyday use the language of science;
second, the restoration of the "critical" value of language learning, it
a special role in the art of understanding texts; third, the emergence of
literature in the narrow and proper sense of the word, reviving the language in its
"intransitive", being self-closed. For modern thinking the most important
scope of the language is the interpretation and formalization, or
otherwise, identifying that , in fact, spoken language, and that all
it might be said. The limit of interpretation-a clash with the
the unconscious, which is not expressible in any language (Freud and
the phenomenology). The limit of formalization -- the pure forms of thinking, devoid of
language shell and translucent in its logical structure (Russell and
structuralism). And here, says Foucault, archaeological soil both
answers, despite their outward opposite one.
But the most characteristic feature of modern episteme is, according to Foucault,
her attitude to the man.
Post a Comment