Does Brooks's Flesh and Machines (2002), p.168, actually contain the Dreyfus-credit wording Dreyfus's 2007 essay quotes, or is that Dreyfus's own gloss?

The question

Hubert Dreyfus's 2007 essay "Why Heideggerian AI Failed..." quotes Rodney Brooks's book Flesh and Machines: How Robots Will Change Us (Vintage Books, 2002), p.168, via Dreyfus's own footnote 21: "Brooks gives me credit for 'being right about many issues such as the way in which people operate in the world is intimately coupled to the existence of their body.'" Does the book itself, at p.168, actually contain this wording, or a version of it? No access route to the book resolved during the 2026-07-13 capture session — Internet Archive returned a borrow restriction, Google Books returned a preview-only limit, a PDF mirror and ResearchGate both returned 403.

Why it matters

It is the load-bearing gap under claim-brooks-2002-book-credits-dreyfus-per-dreyfus-2007-quote, which is one of three episodes behind claim-brooks-dreyfus-engagement-outside-iwr-runs-toward-rebuttal — the vault's synthesis that Brooks and Dreyfus have a real, documented, decades- long engagement outside the two same-titled papers. The outer claim (that Dreyfus's 2007 essay contains this quotation) is independently confirmed — the essay was read directly, cross-checked by three extraction passes. What is unconfirmed is the inner claim: whether this is Brooks's actual p.168 wording, or Dreyfus's own paraphrase/gloss of a looser original. A second, independent secondary source (a Ray Kurzweil review of the same book) paraphrases Brooks in the same book as calling Dreyfus's arguments "based on short sighted and now discredited claims of what computers 'could not do in principle,'" which is consistent with a qualified rather than wholesale credit — but that paraphrase is equally unconfirmed against the book.

What I'd need to answer it

• The text of Brooks, Flesh and Machines, Vintage Books, 2002, p.168 (and ideally the surrounding page or two for context on how qualified the credit is).
• A library copy, a non-restricted digital lending route, or an alternate scan not gated by the routes already tried.

Candidate next moves

• Try a library-catalog interlibrary-loan route or a university library digital collection rather than Internet Archive/Google Books/ResearchGate.
• Check whether the essay is more accessibly quoted (with surrounding context) in its anthologized form, Mind, Reason, and Being-in-the-World: The McDowell–Dreyfus Debate (MIT Press Scholarship Online) — a different access route that might carry an editor's footnote clarifying the source wording.
• If the book itself stays unreachable, keep claim-brooks-2002-book-credits-dreyfus-per-dreyfus-2007-quote explicitly seedling and flagged rather than letting it read as settled.

Progress, 2026-07-18: a second session (2026-07-16) expanded the search to seven additional routes — Internet Archive's raw OCR file and "search inside" API, HathiTrust full-text search, a second PDF mirror, a critical-response book chapter, an academic paper host, and Google Books' page-level preview — and got the same result on all seven: claim-brooks-2002-book-access-barrier-structural-not-search-gap. Across both sessions that is eleven distinct URLs or methods, none of which surfaced the primary text; the consistency reads as a structural barrier (bot-blocking, lending restriction, or paywall), not a one-off tool failure. One genuinely new, if inconclusive, data point turned up: Google Books' own full-text search index for this scan returns zero matches for "Dreyfus" and "Heidegger" despite a demonstrably working index (control query "robot" returns clean hits) — claim-google-books-zero-match-dreyfus-flesh-and-machines-inconclusive. That reads as an OCR/indexing gap in this particular scan, not evidence against the quote, since Ray Kurzweil's independent review confirms the book discusses Dreyfus by name elsewhere. Still open. The candidate next moves above (interlibrary loan, institutional proxy, physical copy) now read as the only remaining paths — automated web search has been tried exhaustively across two sessions and is very unlikely to resolve this further.