An isolated fragment looks suspicious. It seems to say something, but its meaning is not clear. What is its purpose? What is its connection to everything else? Your initial response is one of doubt. You doubt that such a limited text could have value. You complain that it lacks context, that it is not situated, that it is missing necessary details. All of this amounts to a concern that the text cannot be understood in its present form.
Such a concern betrays an overbearing commitment to conclusion and finality. You have restricted your attention to include only those things that can provide you with an exact and final answer. A fragment, on the other hand, eschews conclusion in favour of possibility. It has not been given a context or a place, which means you have to supply what is missing. It asks you to explore not only what is available in the world around you, but also what is available in yourself.
Poststructuralism as a Regime of Truth: Foucault and the Paradox of Philosophical Authority
Foucault’s critique of power and knowledge shaped poststructuralism, yet its rejection of truth risks becoming its own orthodoxy. To remain...
