VAL. I think that, despite all analogies, there is the opposition between Marx and Freud on the one hand and Nietzsche on the other. If the rights of Marx, the we must understand Nietzsche as a representative of the bourgeoisie of this era. If rights Freud,we need to turn to bessoznatelnogo Nietzsche. In I see a kind of dispute between Nietzsche and the other two. Aren't we really have today are too many interpretations? We have to say "sick interpretation". Certainly, interpretation is needed. But isn't there also that we interpret? You can put the question: who interpretered? And finally: Yes, we are mystified, but who? If there is a deceiver, then who is he? There is always a plurality interpretations: there is a Marx, Freud, Nietzsche, but there is Gobineau. Is Marxism, psychoanalysis, but there are racial interpretation...
FOUCAULT. The problem of multiple interpretations, conflicts between different interpretations were structurally possible thanks to this the principle of interpretation, when it goes to infinity when there is no the absolute point on which she herself judges and decides. And this is something that we will inevitably be subject to interpretation in the the moment when we interpret, should face each interpreter. The redundancy of interpretations - certainly one of the most the underlying characteristics of modern Western culture.
VAL.
ReplyDeleteI think that, despite all analogies, there is the opposition between
Marx and Freud on the one hand and Nietzsche on the other. If the rights of Marx, the
we must understand Nietzsche as a representative of the bourgeoisie of this era. If
rights Freud,we need to turn to bessoznatelnogo Nietzsche. In
I see a kind of dispute between Nietzsche and the other two.
Aren't we really have today are too many interpretations? We have
to say "sick interpretation". Certainly, interpretation is needed. But
isn't there also that we interpret? You can put
the question: who interpretered? And finally: Yes, we are mystified, but
who? If there is a deceiver, then who is he? There is always a plurality
interpretations: there is a Marx, Freud, Nietzsche, but there is Gobineau. Is Marxism,
psychoanalysis, but there are racial interpretation...
FOUCAULT.
The problem of multiple interpretations, conflicts between different
interpretations were structurally possible thanks to this
the principle of interpretation, when it goes to infinity when there is no
the absolute point on which she herself judges and decides. And
this is something that we will inevitably be subject to interpretation in the
the moment when we interpret, should face each
interpreter. The redundancy of interpretations - certainly one of the most
the underlying characteristics of modern Western culture.