Re: Foucault's Nietzsche

Dear Christoph,

I don't think Foucault says exactly that in _The order of things_but he
does say it more and less.
You were right to be looking at the end where Nietzsche comes in ringing
like a bell.

on page 342 in "The sleep of Anthropology" (NY 1970) for example --

Perhaps we should see the first attempt at this uprooting of
Anthropology--to which no doubt, contemporary thought is dedicated--in the
Nietzschean experience: by means of a philological critique, by means of a
certain form of biologism, Nietzsche rediscovered the point at which man
and God belong to one another, at which the death of second is synonymous
with the disappearance of the first, and at which the promise of the
superman signifies first and foremost the imminence of the death of man.
In this, Nietzsche, offering this future to us as both promise and task,
marks the threshold beyond which contemporary philosophy can begin thinking
again; and he will no doubt continue for awhile to dominate its advance.

and on page 384-5

It will be said that Holderlin, Hegel, Feuerbach, and Marx all felt this
certainty that in them a thought and perhaps a culture were coming to a
close, and that from the depths of a distance, whcih was perhaps not
invincible, another was approaching--in the dim light of dawn [Day Break?],
in the brilliance of noon, or in the dissension of the falling day.
... our day, and once again Nietzsche indicated the turning-point from
a long way off, it is not so much the absence or the death of God that is
affirmed as the end of man (that narrow, imperceptible displacement, that
recession in the form of identity, which are the reason why man's finitude
has become his end) ....

is that helpful at all? not quite the same sound-bite quality but...


Jorge Pedraza


Partial thread listing: