Prof. Maira
ASA 4
13 April 2017
The excerpt from Antonio Gramsci's The Prison Notebooks describes the idea of philosophy and what it means to engage in philosophical thinking. Gramsci's claim that philosophy itself is completely dependent on historical context bears resemblance to Tiongson's thinking in "DJing as a Filipino Thing," where he claims that any cultural practice has a historical significance or origin which needs to be acknowledged and appreciated. I agree with Gramsci's claim that thoughts shape actions and that those thoughts always stem from the environment we are part of. For example, my conception of which mannerisms are appropriate or polite may bear resemblance to the thoughts of someone who is also a first-generation Filipino-American, but the degree to which our thought processes will overlap depends on the degree of similarity between our experiences. History affects culture not only on a population or global level, but also on an individual level. Each individual's views on the world are shaped by their exposure to different cultural practices, and no two individuals will be exactly the same in their views since no two individuals will share exactly the same history. After reading this excerpt, I am still confused about what Gramsci means in his claim that "Philosophy is intellectual order, which neither religion nor common sense can be" (61). What factors make common sense and religion more abstract and therefore less intellectual than philosophy? This confuses me because I view philosophy as an abstract field as well.
Foucault's "Truth and Power" focuses on challenging socially accepted truths and recognizing them as a result of power. In other words, any concept perceived to be "true" has only been socially constructed for us to believe it is. This seems to be an accurate analysis of everything humans have built their lives upon. For example, all scientific discoveries, such as the discovery that the Earth is round instead of flat, are only true because of the language humans have developed to describe its appearance. Language itself has always been imposed upon society by people in power. It also seems that humans have been able to survive and thrive for so long because of their dependence on giving certain individuals positions of power; this is the concept of cultural hegemony, or rule by consent. The existence of leadership offers stability and a feeling of safety for those being ruled over, but Foucault calls his readers to recognize the potential for abuse of this power. He wants his readers to question what they should perceive as true and recognize truth and the spread of information in general as the result of folks in positions of power, who are able to customize what information they want to be spread in the first place. After reading this article, I would still like further clarification on what Foucault means by Nietzsche and how it relates to truth and power.
Foucault's "Truth and Power" focuses on challenging socially accepted truths and recognizing them as a result of power. In other words, any concept perceived to be "true" has only been socially constructed for us to believe it is. This seems to be an accurate analysis of everything humans have built their lives upon. For example, all scientific discoveries, such as the discovery that the Earth is round instead of flat, are only true because of the language humans have developed to describe its appearance. Language itself has always been imposed upon society by people in power. It also seems that humans have been able to survive and thrive for so long because of their dependence on giving certain individuals positions of power; this is the concept of cultural hegemony, or rule by consent. The existence of leadership offers stability and a feeling of safety for those being ruled over, but Foucault calls his readers to recognize the potential for abuse of this power. He wants his readers to question what they should perceive as true and recognize truth and the spread of information in general as the result of folks in positions of power, who are able to customize what information they want to be spread in the first place. After reading this article, I would still like further clarification on what Foucault means by Nietzsche and how it relates to truth and power.
No comments:
Post a Comment