Foucault’s Human: A Fabled Conversation about the Reality of knowing (Part_1) ⇒ Kirno Sohochari

micheal-foucault_7

Foucault: Look “I don’t feel that it is necessary to know exactly what I am. The main interest in life and work is to become someone else that you were not in the beginning.”

…: Perhaps you are right Sir, it is quite difficult to know “Who I am” and from where the “am” begun its journey to the life. Question of beginning is certainly tricky where the answer is uncertain and maybe it is endlessly endless. Then why we return to the question over and again? Is it just the curiosity of human mind or it is an indicator that we know very little about the fact of life?

Is it proving that our knowledge is insufficient to reach the cardinal moment of life? And or it is an identity crisis that we are still in the dark to hear the natal beats of this valued existence? How could you explain the Socratic meaning that “Know thyself” is the beginning of everything? How could it possible to know ourselves without knowing anything about the beginning!

micheal-foucault_9Foucault: I am sorry to say you failed to understand my point. You contradict your own
when you are crazy to reach the blurry line, which be obscured by the beginning of beginning. I don’t think that “Know thyself” does mean this. It is more important for you to consider the fact that you are not standing in beginning that maybe started at any uncertain point of beginning.

I am not interested to spend my effort to just knowing about the certain point. The question of beginning and the ending are meaningless to me. I do not wake from the sleep to just deal with the starting or an ending point. Tell me one thing what have you perceived when you quoted the Socrates that you have to know yourself?

…: To me? Yes, I am the admirer of Socratic Method but not the Greek legend itself. His quotes and dialogue means alot to me. He inspired me to sprouting and debating on the word that “that’s all I know myself is that I know nothing about me”. I think “Know Thyself” is the endless beginning of the knowing, where the knowing questioned oneself about the knowing.

What I have learned from Socrates is that I cannot appreciated me as the “true being” of the world as if not relates me to the beginning of the “being”. To me “know thyself” is an endless journey between the “what I am now” and “what I was at the beginning of beginning”.

Foucault: I see! You are very fond of to your genealogy. Question of beginning is a dotted line of certainty, your God of certainty could have existed there. As often you make your journey by following the dotted line, you provoked to believe that this and this or this dots are certain for the beginning, and very soon you return to the dot from where your journey was start over. The searching for the beginning is a perplexing elimination of the reality that “you are not staying in the beginning.”

micheal-foucault_4

It is a false epistemology of representing your real identity as an illusion. You are not an exterior phenomenal; instead of you are the phenomenon of the existed reality and living on the reality without any acknowledgment that from when it was start and where will end. The knowledge of reality depends on the knowledge of acceptance that you are belonging to the reality before it ends. It is not necessary to know the end. The only certain thing is that you are existed on the reality to celebrate and examine it by your knowledge that in how and which way it could extend so far.

This knowledge is not the repetition of the same old question that “when all these staffs were starting over and what is their fate at the end.” I summarize it with a short glance, just think about that:

“If you knew when you began a book what you would say at the end, do you think that you would have the courage to write it? What is true for writing and for a love relationship is true also for life. The game is worthwhile insofar as we don’t know what will be the end.”

…: in that case, what is the purpose of knowledge? What does knowledge means if we cannot relate it to the blurry past to trace the historical facts of this valued reality? You work lot with the historical periods of human civilization. When you wrote down the thesis on madness, clinical medication and sexuality, you had to relate you to the beginning of these phenomena. When you say in some certainty that:

“…if you are not like everybody else, then you are abnormal, if you are abnormal, then you are sick. These three categories, not being like everybody else, not being normal and being sick are in fact very different but have been reduced to the same thing.”

Your theory mean and indicating the historical facts of the society people and the synthesis finds an edging point that madness and sexuality indeed an outburst of the prevailing game of power domination against the dominated powerless. Was it possible for you to write down the vigorous facts of civilization without traced the dotted line of beginning and relates the dots to the present?

micheal-foucault_2

Foucault: You are correct that I am not an outsider of the fence. I also am the follower of dotted line, from where my doubt and question could find the answer that why power and discipline itself a reality of the reality. I symbolized these words as an existence of reality where the game of dominant and dominated is nevertheless endless, but it is not the same thing you have to mean it.

My eyes are keeping on the reality of the societal being and I am not interested on the being that is maybe transcendental. Reality is functional with the reality that we are incognito and living here to dominate the being by wearing the mask of enlightenment. The searching for the beginning of beginning is such an incognita, where you try to prove that you are become enlightened by searching this.

Your wishful desires falsify the fact that “Knowledge is not for knowing: knowledge is for cutting.” I am living in the reality to cut-down the facts of past. My friend, “I don’t write a book so that it will be the final word; I write a book so that other books are possible, not necessarily written by me.”

You have to remember that, “I’m no prophet. My job is making windows where there were once walls.” I think the understanding of reality depends on the way you examined it finally and I know my way of living on it.

Continued to next part.

Foucault’s Human, A Fabled Conversation on the Reality of knowing, Part_2

micheal-foucault_8

Advertisements