"We want neither to deny nor to renounce, nor to destroy nore to go back: thus we would once again give proof of barbarism. Hence the wish to return back cannot mean anything else for us but one thing: to resume contact with life and with what is 'natural' and primitive in it, return to the first source from which springs not only science but also all the other manifestations of spiritual life, to study again the essential relationships which can be found originally, before science has modeled it after its fashion, between the different phenomena of which life is composed, to see whether we cannot extract from them something other than science does, without thereby plunging either into primitive naturalism nor mysticism which lso 'rationalizes' in its imagery to which it resorts. We want to look 'without instruments,' and say what we see. Contrary to appearances, this is, incidentally, a pretty difficult assignment."
Minkowski.
"The past of human existence as a whole is not a nothing, but that to which we always return when we have put down deep roots. But this return is not a passive acceptance of what has been, but its transmutation."
Heidegger.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_xWVvloAdArk/S8F-VqanREI/AAAAAAAADRM/3FiYZigqGAc/s1600/Exhibition-Explores-2.jpg
-----------------------
"Man is a coral animal embedded in technological reefs of extruded psychic objects."
--- On Wed, 3/11/10, Karskens, M.L.J. (Machiel) <mkarskens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Karskens, M.L.J. (Machiel) <mkarskens@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Duration, Dasein, Geneology, Archaeology.
> To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Received: Wednesday, 3 November, 2010, 9:19 PM
> In Foucault's published works, I
> cannot find indications that Foucault really was a
> 'close'reader of Heidegger. In comparaison wih e.g. Hegel,
> Kant or Nietzsche there are not many references (18)to
> Heidegger in Dits et Ecrits. Nearly all references to
> Heidegger are by the way or in a list of names.
>
> Of course, in the interview 'Le retour de la morale' after
> a question on Heidegger, Foucault himself said that he was a
> close reader of Heidegger in the 1950s, and that Heidegger
> was the essential philosopher to him. So what!
> Self-testimonies are not very reliable. And taking his words
> as a truth, even then they do not say that he always has
> been a close reader, he speaks only of 1952 and 1953. (see
> Dits et Ecrits, IV p. 703)
>
> Moreover, I could not find any place in his works where he
> directely discusses or analyses a text of Heidegger or one
> of Heidegger's philosophical notions or ideas. Foucault
> himself also says so in the same interview.
>
> I could neither detect in his works or in his methods a
> typical Heidegerrian approach or way of thinking. Some
> people claim that the Analytic of Finitude in The Order of
> Things is Heideggerian. I my opinion it is much more
> Kantian, and derived from his thesis on Kant's Antropology,
> then Heideggerian.
>
> yours
> machiel karskens
>
>
>
> ----- "michael bibby" <shmickeyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > From: "michael bibby" <shmickeyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2010 6:17:18 AM
> > Subject: [Foucault-L] Duration, Dasein, Geneology,
> Archaeology.
> >
> > Certainly, Foucault was a close reader of Heidegger,
> who in turn was a
> > close reader of Bergson. This is also true of
> Minkowski, and a host of
> > others who seem to have rallied around Bergsons book
> which emerged as
> > a balwark against the 'scientific barbarism',
> 'mechanistic
> > rationality', 'technocrasy' of the age. Perhaps we
> could say that
> > Foucault was reponding, in part at least, to the same
> crises which
> > Bergson, Minkowski, Heidegger, Spengler, and many
> others were
> > responding to, what we could provisionally call 'the
> crises of
> > history', 'the crises of modernity'- the temporal
> crises which Elliot
> > found at the crossroads of Little Gidding, the
> spiritual crises which
> > Toynbee saw the west involving the rest of the world
> in as it spread
> > its civilization throughout it.
> >
> > Jungs description of the wandering jew who is unable
> to draw fresh
> > life from the earth through his feet because they have
> been uprooted
> > from their ancestral land could just as easily be
> applied to 'modern
> > man', ahistorical and independent of geographical
> place, rendered
> > mobile and shut up in hismself. Indeed, we see that it
> was, and least
> > of all in Mein Kampf. We could say that this picture
> of the Jew is
> > really a kind of charicture of modern man, more
> precisely of his
> > 'priestly nature', to borrow Marx's expression.
> >
> > The archaic revival in Germany, we read in The
> Function of the Orgasm,
> > can be seen as a responce, although confused as to its
> object, to the
> > 'mystical longing' opened up in the depths of mans
> alienation from the
> > archaeology of the land, from the geneology of his
> people: just as the
> > Jew had an ancient tradition which he carried around
> with him like an
> > arab his tent through the desert, so too the German
> had the
> > Indo-European- a retrospective hypothesis- geneology
> to restore him to
> > the profundity from which he had become estranged
> through
> > abstraction.
> >
> > Tarkovsky takes up these themes in his allegory of
> Solviet Russia in
> > the form of the oceanic space-station Solaris: this is
> the precise
> > meaning of the pot-plant, which is the last thing we
> see before we
> > leave the space station- the strange melieu in which
> it alone made the
> > only sense- and return to earth.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
Minkowski.
"The past of human existence as a whole is not a nothing, but that to which we always return when we have put down deep roots. But this return is not a passive acceptance of what has been, but its transmutation."
Heidegger.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_xWVvloAdArk/S8F-VqanREI/AAAAAAAADRM/3FiYZigqGAc/s1600/Exhibition-Explores-2.jpg
-----------------------
"Man is a coral animal embedded in technological reefs of extruded psychic objects."
--- On Wed, 3/11/10, Karskens, M.L.J. (Machiel) <mkarskens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Karskens, M.L.J. (Machiel) <mkarskens@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Duration, Dasein, Geneology, Archaeology.
> To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Received: Wednesday, 3 November, 2010, 9:19 PM
> In Foucault's published works, I
> cannot find indications that Foucault really was a
> 'close'reader of Heidegger. In comparaison wih e.g. Hegel,
> Kant or Nietzsche there are not many references (18)to
> Heidegger in Dits et Ecrits. Nearly all references to
> Heidegger are by the way or in a list of names.
>
> Of course, in the interview 'Le retour de la morale' after
> a question on Heidegger, Foucault himself said that he was a
> close reader of Heidegger in the 1950s, and that Heidegger
> was the essential philosopher to him. So what!
> Self-testimonies are not very reliable. And taking his words
> as a truth, even then they do not say that he always has
> been a close reader, he speaks only of 1952 and 1953. (see
> Dits et Ecrits, IV p. 703)
>
> Moreover, I could not find any place in his works where he
> directely discusses or analyses a text of Heidegger or one
> of Heidegger's philosophical notions or ideas. Foucault
> himself also says so in the same interview.
>
> I could neither detect in his works or in his methods a
> typical Heidegerrian approach or way of thinking. Some
> people claim that the Analytic of Finitude in The Order of
> Things is Heideggerian. I my opinion it is much more
> Kantian, and derived from his thesis on Kant's Antropology,
> then Heideggerian.
>
> yours
> machiel karskens
>
>
>
> ----- "michael bibby" <shmickeyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > From: "michael bibby" <shmickeyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2010 6:17:18 AM
> > Subject: [Foucault-L] Duration, Dasein, Geneology,
> Archaeology.
> >
> > Certainly, Foucault was a close reader of Heidegger,
> who in turn was a
> > close reader of Bergson. This is also true of
> Minkowski, and a host of
> > others who seem to have rallied around Bergsons book
> which emerged as
> > a balwark against the 'scientific barbarism',
> 'mechanistic
> > rationality', 'technocrasy' of the age. Perhaps we
> could say that
> > Foucault was reponding, in part at least, to the same
> crises which
> > Bergson, Minkowski, Heidegger, Spengler, and many
> others were
> > responding to, what we could provisionally call 'the
> crises of
> > history', 'the crises of modernity'- the temporal
> crises which Elliot
> > found at the crossroads of Little Gidding, the
> spiritual crises which
> > Toynbee saw the west involving the rest of the world
> in as it spread
> > its civilization throughout it.
> >
> > Jungs description of the wandering jew who is unable
> to draw fresh
> > life from the earth through his feet because they have
> been uprooted
> > from their ancestral land could just as easily be
> applied to 'modern
> > man', ahistorical and independent of geographical
> place, rendered
> > mobile and shut up in hismself. Indeed, we see that it
> was, and least
> > of all in Mein Kampf. We could say that this picture
> of the Jew is
> > really a kind of charicture of modern man, more
> precisely of his
> > 'priestly nature', to borrow Marx's expression.
> >
> > The archaic revival in Germany, we read in The
> Function of the Orgasm,
> > can be seen as a responce, although confused as to its
> object, to the
> > 'mystical longing' opened up in the depths of mans
> alienation from the
> > archaeology of the land, from the geneology of his
> people: just as the
> > Jew had an ancient tradition which he carried around
> with him like an
> > arab his tent through the desert, so too the German
> had the
> > Indo-European- a retrospective hypothesis- geneology
> to restore him to
> > the profundity from which he had become estranged
> through
> > abstraction.
> >
> > Tarkovsky takes up these themes in his allegory of
> Solviet Russia in
> > the form of the oceanic space-station Solaris: this is
> the precise
> > meaning of the pot-plant, which is the last thing we
> see before we
> > leave the space station- the strange melieu in which
> it alone made the
> > only sense- and return to earth.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>