Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 13:24:05 -0500 (EST)
From: John Ransom <ransom-AT-dickinson.edu>
Subject: Re: Deleuze's fifth paragraph


On Wed, 14 Jan 1998, Erik Hoogcarspel wrote:

> 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
> 

And maybe not just another line but a better line. If you have the time
and the desire, please expand your thoughts above. 
--John