The Role of Paradoxical Structure

The rights of man are supposedly fundamental, at least in accordance with the constitution of the United States, a document, that along with the Bill of Rights, dictates human rights as granted by this legendary piece of paper and cannot be removed without just cause, even though “just” may have entirely different definitions to everyone. The main issue with this statement is that if rights themselves are fundamental, and yet are also granted to the individual, how did they and do they exist as a function of human existence. This issue is raised in unique settings by both Michel Foucault and Barbara Johnson in their individual critiques through the construction of paradoxes that exemplify the confusing nature of right as it pertains to power and truth. Foucault establishes a circular paradox regarding truth, right, and power as a system of interplay that functions to decipher the structure in which they coexist while Johnson formulates her position through the use of apostrophe to show the polar positions of abortion as it pertains to rights and power. Their use of paradox highlights the construction of their arguments while showcasing their ideas by comparing them to the extreme critiques at their respective poles, thus allowing them to play off the poles without having to toe the same lines.

Michael Foucault constructs his paradoxical argument through the use of contradictory phrases in order to show the difficulty in understanding his argument. Foucault would rather shift from generality to example then back to a separate generality and example in order to show that this argument requires a complex understanding of political, economic and social theory in order to deconstruct it. In relation to power over others as it...

... middle of paper ...

...think a dangerous and controversial topic is bypassed.

While Foucault attempts to overflow theory into language in order to over-saturate the concept of power to show the already-misguided approaches to it, Johnson breaks down the issue of power and places it within language. These contrasting viewpoints show the difficulties in establishing a concrete and stagnant definition of power as it pertains to the individual, and therefore one must understand that power is an entity that is ever-changing, housed in language, economic discourse, and many other exciting venues. Power and the right to have it are paradoxical issues because each avenue of thought shows a counterpoint with equal validity, forcing one to attempt to make a decision that cannot accurately be made. Power as a paradox exists because power is a paradox, one crafted through language and rhetoric.