Op 14-jan-98 schreef John Ransom:
>Does anyone else see -- or does everyone else see -- the Heideggerian
>element in Foucault's work as summarized by Deleuze? The "shock" that I
>Heidegger was supposed to supply to Foucault consists, I guess, in the
>revelation (from _BT_) that we are thrown into environments that shape our
>consciousness and color our "intentional" moods without ourselves being
>reflectively aware of the bias or spin present in such seemingly natural
>circumstances. The same point is made in later work by Heidegger, though
>with adjustments. (I've found Gerald L. Bruns' books, _Heidegger's
>Estrangements_ and _Hermeneutics: Ancient and Modern_ very useful on the
>later Heidegger; believe me, Bruns is a lot better than my clumsy
>summaries.) For instance, in "The Origin of the Work of Art" (1936;
>revised 1957) Heidegger, in a familiar passage, writes,
Could it be that another important line runs from the late Husserl maybe
through Merleau-Ponty to Foucault. Heidegger with his 'homesickness' (Derrida)
looks sometimes as a more or less religious reworking of Husserl (Scheler
called 'Sein und Zeit' theology without God). It was Merleau-Ponty who
mentioned the need for a science of signs (was it in Signes? I'm not sure) and
a scholar from Prague told me that the Husserl-studies there prepared the way
for the acceptance of semiotics.
-erik
>Does anyone else see -- or does everyone else see -- the Heideggerian
>element in Foucault's work as summarized by Deleuze? The "shock" that I
>Heidegger was supposed to supply to Foucault consists, I guess, in the
>revelation (from _BT_) that we are thrown into environments that shape our
>consciousness and color our "intentional" moods without ourselves being
>reflectively aware of the bias or spin present in such seemingly natural
>circumstances. The same point is made in later work by Heidegger, though
>with adjustments. (I've found Gerald L. Bruns' books, _Heidegger's
>Estrangements_ and _Hermeneutics: Ancient and Modern_ very useful on the
>later Heidegger; believe me, Bruns is a lot better than my clumsy
>summaries.) For instance, in "The Origin of the Work of Art" (1936;
>revised 1957) Heidegger, in a familiar passage, writes,
Could it be that another important line runs from the late Husserl maybe
through Merleau-Ponty to Foucault. Heidegger with his 'homesickness' (Derrida)
looks sometimes as a more or less religious reworking of Husserl (Scheler
called 'Sein und Zeit' theology without God). It was Merleau-Ponty who
mentioned the need for a science of signs (was it in Signes? I'm not sure) and
a scholar from Prague told me that the Husserl-studies there prepared the way
for the acceptance of semiotics.
-erik