From Coetzee to The Chomsky-Foucault Debates

Can't totally explain the progression of thought (mental gymnastics) that led me to, reminded me of, these debates (which I've never heard or read in toto): prejudice = what we take for granted (Heidegger), the legacy of Socrates = Ventriloquism (Coetzee's Age of Iron), what "coloured" means in the milieu in which a young Coetzee (or the subject/object of the narrator's gaze in Coetzee's Boyhood) grows up:
. . . Coloured, which means that he has no money, lives in an obscure hovel, goes hungry; it means that if his mother were to call out 'Boy!' and wave, as she is quite capable of doing, this boy would have to stop in his tracks and come and do whatever she might tell him (carry her shopping basket, for instance), and at the end of it get a tickey in his cupped hands and be grateful for it. And if he were angry with his mother afterwards, she would simply smile and say, 'But they are used to it!' 
*

Anyway, found this debate transcript (the third?) online, scanned it, and admired Foucault = Devil's Advocate, and the way he kept chipping away at Chomsky's notions of "human nature" and "justice."

http://www.chomsky.info/debates/1971xxxx.htm

Comments

POPULAR POSTS

Kafka and Rilke

TÜBINGEN, JANUARY by Paul Celan

Edinburgh: St. Cuthbert's: Thomas De Quincey's Grave

The Parlograph