I'm pretty sure that the "Being and Power" essay is available on Dreyfus's
webpage:
socrates.berkeley.edu/~hdreyfus
i would suggest listening to some of the lectures from the seminar
on heidegger and foucault that dreyfus gave with judith butler and
beatrice han in fall 99. dreyfus there propounded his reading of foucault
from the "being and power" essay, and butler and rabinow (who sat in on
the course) responded with a lot of interesting criticism.
these lectures are available in realaudio and mp3 format at:
http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~hdreyfus/hdreyfus290/html/lecture.html
-alex tauras
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Christopher Daly wrote:
> Dear Morton, I have, in manuscript form, a paper by Hubert Dreyfus entitled
> "Being and Power: Heidegger and Foucault." If you want a copy of it send me
> your snail mail address and I'll send you one. This paper might be
> published by now somewhere but I don't know where. Somebody gave this to me
> at either Johns Hopkins or the New School. It relates to what you are
> looking at but is not specifically on Nietsche.
> Cheers,
> Chris
> P.S. I can do the same for a limited number of others.
>
> >From: Morten Lyngeng <morten.lyngeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: Genealogy&Interpretation
> >Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 12:07:51 +0100
> >
> >Hello everybody!
> >I am working on a paper about Foucaults use of Nietzsches genealogy as a
> >historical/critical "method". If my readings are correct, he more or less
> >broke with his strict archaeological project after "The Archaeology of
> >Knowledge" and concentrated more on how relations of power construct
> >different configurations of knowledge about objects/subjects etc. In that
> >case Im especially interestested in
> > 1) if anybody know of any articles/books which treats Nietzsches own use
> >of
> >his genealogy, or if there are papers on the differences between Foucaults
> >and Nietzsches use of it.
> > 2) Does anybody have a comment, or know any articles, about Foucaults
> >stand against hermeneutics (maybe some interviews) after his turning to
> >genealogy/power. I know Dreyfus & Rabinow calls Foucaults later work a kind
> >of interpretation, but I still wonder what is the main difference between
> >this kind of interpretation and regular hermeneutics. (All hermeneutics
> >doesnt need to be "deep" hermeneutics which reveals some hidden truth, but
> >doesnt all interpretation necessarily say somthing about what a text
> >conceals or implies in addition to what it reveals at "face value"? And
> >similarly: can one say that Nietzsches reading of history is a kind of
> >interpretation/hermeneutics?)
> >
> >If anyone have a comment on these problems, I would be very greatful.
> >
> >
> >Morten Lyngeng
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>