[…] Can accounts of subjectivity and the psychical interior be adequately explained in terms of the body? Can depths, the interior, the subjective, and the private instead be seen in terms of surfaces, bodies, and material relations? Can the mind/body dualism be overcome using the concepts associated with the devalued term of the binary pair of mind and body, that is, are the body and corporeality the (disavowed) grounds and terms on which the opposition is erected and made possible? What happens to conceptual frameworks if the body stands in place of the mind or displaces it from its privileged position defining humanity against its various others? What happens in the bifurcation of sexed bodies — which is, in my opinion, an irreducible cultural universal -that is inevitably part of our understanding of bodies? If mind or subjectivity can be adequately and without reduction explained in terms of bodies, bodies understood in their historicocultural specificity, does this mean that sexual specificity — sexual difference — will be finally understood as a necessary (even if not sufficient) condition of our understanding of subjectivity? Can various key issues and concepts in feminist theory — including women’s experience, subjectivity, desire, pleasure — be reconceived in corporeal terms, whether these are provided by the theoretical frameworks of Nietzsche, Foucault, Deleuze, or others?
Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book
Please log in to get access to this content
To get access to this content you need the following product:
- From ‘Intensities and Flows’
- Macmillan Education UK
- Sequence number
- Chapter number