sunnyspot

Hello, I love this debate. We aren't descended from monkeys. A banana shares 50% of my d.n.a. The "spark" comes from somewhere else. We inhabit this world, but we are not entirely of it. I would rather see this theory taught in schools that the dubious theory of descent from apes only. I mean, hey, we could be descended from apes, but it is equally plausible that a part of us is not of this planet, and given what we now know about the universe, this is very likely. Ten years ago if someone told you there are other planets that support life out there, people would have laughed at you for saying it - but that has changed. Schools need to rethink the whole I'm descended from an ape theory - which is seriously inconsistent.

Hello,

I love this debate. We aren't descended from monkeys. A banana shares 50% of my d.n.a. The "spark" comes from somewhere else. We inhabit this world, but we are not entirely of it. I would rather see this theory taught in schools that the dubious theory of descent from apes only. I mean, hey, we could be descended from apes, but it is equally plausible that a part of us is not of this planet, and given what we now know about the universe, this is very likely. Ten years ago if someone told you there are other planets that support life out there, people would have laughed at you for saying it - but that has changed. Schools need to rethink the whole I'm descended from an ape theory - which is seriously inconsistent.

With so many people, and so much cheap labor big business loves china. I think it doesn't like people interferring in China's domestic affairs, which is fair enough, unless you strongly believe tha Tibetans should get more rights. I'm glad of China. The world is a richer place for it - all that great food and culture. But I like the take it and leave it thing. China isn't a nuclear threat. The U.S is spending too much money to wars, and other things. China wants to be accepted, and I think we are seeing the early beginning of a world giant that will surpass the U.S soon as a global economic power.

With so many people, and so much cheap labor big business loves china. I think it doesn't like people interferring in China's domestic affairs, which is fair enough, unless you strongly believe tha Tibetans should get more rights. I'm glad of China. The world is a richer place for it - all that great food and culture. But I like the take it and leave it thing. China isn't a nuclear threat. The U.S is spending too much money to wars, and other things. China wants to be accepted, and I think we are seeing the early beginning of a world giant that will surpass the U.S soon as a global economic power.

Hi daniel, The trouble is I don't want to be made more efficient. I know I don't feel efficient. I feel like a mess most of the time. That might explain why I'm so tuned into forces around me. Now that I've thought of it, I like our notion of civilisation, at least some parts of it. Innocent until proven guilty is something I like. I like the fact that I don't have my hands cut off for stealing. I also like the fact that I can own a car. I think I take so much for granted, actually. I like having the chance to vote. I feel empowered for one day every four years. I think I have to be more trusting of the law also, because the law is also their to protect. It really intersting how our attitude can have so much to do with how we see things; either roads are a way to get somewhere, an opportunity, or a force of restraint. What are your thoughts on lashing out? Whats a good way to blow off some steam? You know something occured to me reading your comments on Governmentality. The bureacracy is kinda there to protect the government from the people. It occured to me that the focus of the law on the criminal, rather than the crime itself is to protect the Law from the people. The focus shifts to the individual, so if the individual breaks a law, its not the law that is out of place, rather the individual doesn't fit the system, so the individual is out of place, and an entire "corrective" apparatus is built around the individual; I believe this is designed to protect the law from the people. It's a simple view of things, but one I like. We are becoming a surveillance driven society, I think people are more aware of the heightened security but are they aware they are being monitored? I just find it amazing how it corrects behavior? People who are aware they are being watched, even if they are not being watched (but aware that they may be) assume responsibility for their behavior, and God forbid, if they take that awareness with them (say at home - if they fall into the nightmare of becoming mildly paranoid that their being watched or judged), then they begin assuming responsibility for things that aren't even there, and don't exist. What a nightmare. Imagine walking around thinking there is a permanent visibility on you !! Perhaps the best thing a person like this could do is get on stage? Will we come to a point in our society when every individual is monitored, when the restrictions of movement of people become so acute, it gets to the stage when people can no longer migrate, move from one area to the next, or curfews are in force - its all likely to happen. We basically leave a "trail" behind every time we swipe a card, use a credit card, or a mobile phone ... its going to be a far more disciplined society in the future. sunnyspot

Hi daniel,

The trouble is I don't want to be made more efficient. I know I don't feel efficient. I feel like a mess most of the time. That might explain why I'm so tuned into forces around me.

Now that I've thought of it, I like our notion of civilisation, at least some parts of it. Innocent until proven guilty is something I like. I like the fact that I don't have my hands cut off for stealing. I also like the fact that I can own a car. I think I take so much for granted, actually. I like having the chance to vote. I feel empowered for one day every four years. I think I have to be more trusting of the law also, because the law is also their to protect. It really intersting how our attitude can have so much to do with how we see things; either roads are a way to get somewhere, an opportunity, or a force of restraint. What are your thoughts on lashing out? Whats a good way to blow off some steam?

You know something occured to me reading your comments on Governmentality. The bureacracy is kinda there to protect the government from the people. It occured to me that the focus of the law on the criminal, rather than the crime itself is to protect the Law from the people. The focus shifts to the individual, so if the individual breaks a law, its not the law that is out of place, rather the individual doesn't fit the system, so the individual is out of place, and an entire "corrective" apparatus is built around the individual; I believe this is designed to protect the law from the people. It's a simple view of things, but one I like.

We are becoming a surveillance driven society, I think people are more aware of the heightened security but are they aware they are being monitored? I just find it amazing how it corrects behavior? People who are aware they are being watched, even if they are not being watched (but aware that they may be) assume responsibility for their behavior, and God forbid, if they take that awareness with them (say at home - if they fall into the nightmare of becoming mildly paranoid that their being watched or judged), then they begin assuming responsibility for things that aren't even there, and don't exist. What a nightmare. Imagine walking around thinking there is a permanent visibility on you !! Perhaps the best thing a person like this could do is get on stage?

Will we come to a point in our society when every individual is monitored, when the restrictions of movement of people become so acute, it gets to the stage when people can no longer migrate, move from one area to the next, or curfews are in force - its all likely to happen. We basically leave a "trail" behind every time we swipe a card, use a credit card, or a mobile phone ... its going to be a far more disciplined society in the future.

sunnyspot

I don't think Russia has anything to fear from the West in terms of an attack, but I do think that the spread of NATO has slightly turned the heat up on Russia, and that in over the long run this "tension" in the region could play itself out over some "contested territory" either in the balkans or the caucasus or somewhere closer to Russia. I don't think its necessary for Eastern European countries to join NATO, except where NATO offers greater political stability, such as in the balkans. :-)

I don't think Russia has anything to fear from the West in terms of an attack, but I do think that the spread of NATO has slightly turned the heat up on Russia, and that in over the long run this "tension" in the region could play itself out over some "contested territory" either in the balkans or the caucasus or somewhere closer to Russia.

I don't think its necessary for Eastern European countries to join NATO, except where NATO offers greater political stability, such as in the balkans.

:-)

Hi daniel, Thanks for the reply. Once upon a time they used to publicly torture someone for a crime. Then things changed. They introduced "time-tables". The mechanism of punishment changed. Punishment was hidden. It used to be that the public took responsibility for the crime, but that changed. Foucault wrote that "apportioning blame is resistributed". I wonder what he meant by that? The focus turned to what was going on inside the individual, punishment enters "abstract consciousness"(page9). They took away physical pain, sure, but now in its place they deprive the prisoner of all rights, and impose penalties on her. The great irony is that this so called rehabilitative process, actually represses. I love what Foucault says on page 11. He writes "One no longer touched the body ... and then only to reach something other than the body itself". This is such a brilliant surmation and so profound. A system all around us where "things" basically intervene upon the body in order to push it, move it, deprive it, gotta go this way and not that way. Its a whole system of suspended rights. How can I look more positively at this? How do you see it? I really like what you said about the "King" and the "warden". Foucault had this to say on page 11 of a doctor ... there is a " - juxtaposition of himself as an agent of welfare, as the alleviator of pain, whose official task is also to end life." This is very much like a King in the old times, and yet it could be anyone in a position of responsibility. It could a parent who has the power to be an agent of welfare, a cause of pain, and an alleviator of it ... etc. The idea that the condemned man was no longer to be seen, is quite a horrible thing when I think about it. "... He must not see nor be seen". sunnyspot

Hi daniel,

Thanks for the reply.

Once upon a time they used to publicly torture someone for a crime. Then things changed. They introduced "time-tables". The mechanism of punishment changed. Punishment was hidden. It used to be that the public took responsibility for the crime, but that changed. Foucault wrote that "apportioning blame is resistributed". I wonder what he meant by that? The focus turned to what was going on inside the individual, punishment enters "abstract consciousness"(page9). They took away physical pain, sure, but now in its place they deprive the prisoner of all rights, and impose penalties on her. The great irony is that this so called rehabilitative process, actually represses. I love what Foucault says on page 11. He writes "One no longer touched the body ... and then only to reach something other than the body itself". This is such a brilliant surmation and so profound. A system all around us where "things" basically intervene upon the body in order to push it, move it, deprive it, gotta go this way and not that way. Its a whole system of suspended rights. How can I look more positively at this? How do you see it?

I really like what you said about the "King" and the "warden". Foucault had this to say on page 11 of a doctor ... there is a " - juxtaposition of himself as an agent of welfare, as the alleviator of pain, whose official task is also to end life." This is very much like a King in the old times, and yet it could be anyone in a position of responsibility. It could a parent who has the power to be an agent of welfare, a cause of pain, and an alleviator of it ... etc.

The idea that the condemned man was no longer to be seen, is quite a horrible thing when I think about it. "... He must not see nor be seen".

sunnyspot

Hello all, I love the work of Michel Foucault, and wanted to get a discussion started. Just wantd to hear some opinions on his ideas. Power for Foucault was not to be found in an individual, rather in a "distribution of bodies, surfaces, lights, gazes" ... an arrangement in which the individuals get caught up in. Just seems to me that we are caught up in a mechanism that operates our every move, even thoughts. This "permanent visibility" Foucault refers too fascinates me. On page 202 of Discipline and Punish, Foucault brings to light something that has me thinking about who I am, what I am, and questioning everything in the world around me. He says, that someone who is aware that they are being observed, or directed or assessed, "assumes repsonbility for the constraints of power". In other words, walking down the street, waiting for the ''green signal'' to go before we walk, the minutest "rules" we adhere too, and that we are aware of, makes us "the principles of our own subjection." It gives new meaning to the phrase "ignorance is bliss". Imagine living in a world, where you are keenly aware of every constraints, lines, surfaces, bodies and gazes that act as forces upon you? Not a happy place to be. The disciplinary mechanism is everywhere. What were Foucault's suggestions about overcoming this? regards, sunnyspot

Hello all,

I love the work of Michel Foucault, and wanted to get a discussion started.

Just wantd to hear some opinions on his ideas.

Power for Foucault was not to be found in an individual, rather in a "distribution of bodies, surfaces, lights, gazes" ... an arrangement in which the individuals get caught up in.

Just seems to me that we are caught up in a mechanism that operates our every move, even thoughts. This "permanent visibility" Foucault refers too fascinates me. On page 202 of Discipline and Punish, Foucault brings to light something that has me thinking about who I am, what I am, and questioning everything in the world around me. He says, that someone who is aware that they are being observed, or directed or assessed, "assumes repsonbility for the constraints of power". In other words, walking down the street, waiting for the ''green signal'' to go before we walk, the minutest "rules" we adhere too, and that we are aware of, makes us "the principles of our own subjection."

It gives new meaning to the phrase "ignorance is bliss". Imagine living in a world, where you are keenly aware of every constraints, lines, surfaces, bodies and gazes that act as forces upon you? Not a happy place to be.

The disciplinary mechanism is everywhere.

What were Foucault's suggestions about overcoming this?

regards, sunnyspot