Abstract While Wittgenstein crafts a method of thinking, Derrida constructs the linguistic structure of philosophy within literature. In his view, philosophy exists solely within language and the language of the pen is the primary form. Language, then, for both philosophers, is the sole arbiter of philosophy. Without language, there can be no salient thought. Language and thought combine to create a form, but not a substance. Wittgenstein worked within the form; Derrida worked to provide the substance. On discourse in thought and the use of language, Wittgenstein and Derrida differed at least slightly.
A description of Jacques Derrida's attitude towards the term "animal" and examination of the viewpoints of Martin Heidegger and Jacques Lacan regarding this term.
Abstract This paper examines how Derrida applies his process of deconstruction to the term "animal." It looks at how Derrida asserts that "animal" and "human" did not always represent two distinct categories; rather, there are humans, mice, monkeys, snakes, etc., and a human is no more different from a mouse than a snake is from an elephant. The paper also discusses how, when Judeo-Christian thought became dominant, the concept of "the animal" came into existence as an absolute other and, with this linguistic separation, came a psychical divide that caused us to lose touch with the dark, mysterious, "animal" which resides deep inside of ourselves.
Outline:
Introduction
Derrida On Lacan: The Animal Cannot Cover Up Its Tracks. But Can The Human?
The Seer
The Great Disavowal
From the Paper "An animal's relationship to the world is limited by its "disinhibitors" - its inner drives that render it completely passive to its bodily demands. Heidegger calls this state of passivity "captivation." The animal is completely at one with its disinhibitor - it does not have the reflexive ability to step back from its drives and perceive that it is controlled by them. Because it cannot see outside of its "disinhibiting ring," it only perceives the world insofar as it relates to its own instinctual demands. Not being able to escape this state of stupefaction, objects only exist for the animal in relation to its present needs. Unable to step out of its disinhibiting ring, it cannot perceive objects as existing in themselves, as more than a means to serve the ends of its disinhibitors. Passivity with respect to its disinhibitor implies passivity with respect to objects in the world - it must use and perceive them only insofar as its disinhibiting ring requires. "
Abstract This paper examines whether it is justified for literary scholars to critique Derrida and post-structuralism as apolitical. It is evident that such criticism is accurate, for Derrida's theory of language holds that there is no inherent relationship between the linguistic signifier and the signified. The paper shows that this is broad implications, for accepting this denial of a relationship between signifier and signified requires acknowledgement that the meaning of a word issues from the structure of language itself.
From the Paper "In analyzing whether it is justified for literary scholars to critique Derrida and post-structuralism as apolitical, it is evident that such criticism is accurate, for Derrida's theory of language holds that there is no inherent relationship between the linguistic signifier and the signified. This is broad implications, for accepting this denial of a relationship between signifier and signified requires acknowledgement that the meaning of a word issues from the structure of language itself. Even more implications ensue because of Derrida's argument that words gain their meaning through the process of difference, which he described as a dual process involving differing and deferring. In this theoretical process, every element has to refer to the other element in order to define itself."
Abstract The paper exposes certain key and central issues present in "Differance" that place the work in a framework in which it can be clearly understood. The paper shows how Derrida moves beyond the dualism of traditional Western thought to expose a view of reality which assumes that there is a permanent truth that can be discerned behind appearance. The paper examines Derrida's belief that meaning and truth are not static and that understanding reality through language is not a simple matter of connecting the signifier with the signified or the word and its apparent designated meaning.
Outline:
Preamble
Understanding the text of Differance
From the Paper "Philosophy and Western thought has for centuries, since Platonic idealism, wrestled with the concept of a dualistic view of reality. The Platonic view of the ideal and the real forms constitute the underlying basis of Western thought. An implicit and critical part of Platonic thought is the separation between common reality and the ideal forms and Truth. This separation between being and Being is also, for Heidegger, the fundamental structure of Western metaphysics. The assumption of duality and reason as modes of reality in modern thought was radically questioned by Nietzsche and later in the works of Jacques Derrida and Martin Heidegger, among others."
Abstract This paper contends that Aristotle and Derrida both devote a great deal of attention to the issue of friendship. This paper analyzes both men's opinions on the question of whether reciprocity is necessary in friendship.
This paper compares the philosophies of Thomas S. Kuhn, as presented in "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" and of Jacques Derrida, as presented in his essay entitled "Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences".
Abstract This paper explains that, stressing the specific structure of scientific revolutions, Thomas S. Kuhn's structural account of the production of scientific knowledge constructs a generalized picture of the process by which a science is born and undergoes change and development. The author points out that Jacques Derrida's deconstructive viewpoint on structure complicates Kuhn's account of normal versus revolutionary science because Derrida opposes reason from the inside. The paper relates that Derrida's analysis of the construct of structure decenters Kuhn's notion of a paradigm in which Kuhn believes normal science takes place; that paradigm itself represents a fixed origin, which Derrida insists cannot exist independently.
From the Paper "In order to fully understand how Derrida's deconstruction of discourse relates to Kuhn's structure of scientific revolutions, one must first analyze the process Kuhn exemplifies. For Kuhn, the production of scientific knowledge undergoes six main steps. The first is a pre-paradigm stage in which the natural phenomena that later form the subject matter of a science are studied and explained from widely differing points of view. Next comes the emergence of a paradigm that is published by recognized scientists and defines the concepts and methods of research appropriate to the study of those particular phenomena. The third stage in the development of scientific knowledge is a period of normal science in which theories are explored and scientific puzzles are solved. A critical stage is the discovery of new phenomena that violate the expectations of that particular paradigm."
Tags: paradigm, deconstruction, anomalies, rules, process
Abstract This paper discusses postmodern philosophy and the term "differance," which was coined by Jacques Derrida to challenge the totalitarian view of being and attempt a more authentic description of our existence. The writer explains differance, which Derrida insisted does not have any kind of form, using several types of examples. The paper concludes that Derrida calls on us to remain disturbed - to keep us focused on the deferred presence-ing that ultimately leads us to the absolute.
From the Paper "Post-modernism realizes that there is an open world out there. The metaphysics of being does not singly define the world that we live in. Instead there is a "breaking open" of long-held beliefs that we have grown accustomed to. This means then that the ground that we have all been relying upon has been removed. An imagery of the rug being swept under one's feet comes into mind. Derrida is an example of such a man who sweeps the rug and makes one off balance. It is his concept of the play of differance that seeks to replace the totality of being. Derrida then enjoins us not to fall trap to a totalitarian view of the whole but rather to a constant dynamism that truly characterizes our existence."
This paper review and compares three books: "Philosophy and Social Hope" by Richard Rorty, "The Law of Peoples" by John Rawls, and "Cosmopolitanism and Forgiveness" by Jacques Derrida.
Abstract This paper examines these three books and evaluates each in terms of its political feasibility. It explains that these writers, especially Rawls and Derrida, are well known in philosophical circles as being among the top abstract social theorists, but it is difficult for us to see their ideas in a social context other than when they pause to criticize society in their work. It discusses how Rorty considers himself to be among the premier "neo-pragmatists" and draws upon the tradition of Dewey. Derrida first came to the United States as a celebrity in philosophical quarters as he helped invent linguistic deconstruction. Rawls was Harvard's premier theorist, along with his contemporary, Robert Nozick, in the early 1970?s.
From the Paper "Richard Rorty is a self-described ?neo-pragmatist,? who considers himself a dutiful disciple of William James and John Dewey. James and Dewey were notably different from Rorty's contemporaries as he describes them; instead of limiting the study of philosophy to the abstract realm of discussing minor logical or epistemological points, James and Dewey proposed broad-sweeping social changes that were predicated on ideas of social embetterment. James, the first of these, proposed that the meaning of ideas is found only in terms of their possible consequences. Rorty expands this to a contrarian attack on the effete distance maintained by intellectuals from the goal of building an American democracy based on mutual improvement. Rorty proposes a "liberal utopia," but rather than believing that it is not so much the destiny of human nature or of history, he opines that it is simply the best idea that men have produced from the objectives for which they work."
Abstract This paper examines Philip Larkin's poem "Church Going" from a deconstructionalist perspective. It also looks at how deconstruction is, a mode of literary criticism and how first advocated by Jacques Derrida, this literary theory has spread like wildfire throughout Western humanities departments. It begins with an overview of deconstructionalist theory, followed by a brief history of "The Movement" (the group to which Larkin was classified) and concludes with an extensive analysis of the poem.
From the Paper "This poem is indicative of both Larkin and the poetry group categorized as "The Movement" to which Larkin, albeit reluctantly, was assigned. Following World War II in Britain, there was a general sense of disillusionment that accompanied imperial decline. In its wake, a group of lower-middle-class white poets emerged that have since been labeled ?The Movement.? This group consisted of such poets as Kingsley Amis, Elizabeth Jennings, Philip Larkin, Donald Davie, Thom Gunn, Robert Conquest, John Halloway, and John Wain, among many disputed others. The poetry from these individuals tends to reflect everyday life, with a (at the time) newfound emphasis on clarity, democratic values, religious decline and intellectual detachment."
Abstract Analysis of how Thomas Hardy's poem, "I Look into My Glass," illustrates Jacques Derrida's belief that it is a function of language that words and concepts do not have a perfect 1-to-1 relationship.
From the Paper "Jacques Derrida's "The Exorbitant. Question of Method" from "Of Grammatology" articulates the concept of the supplement out of the writing of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Derrida views the usage of the word "supplement" as having both negative and positive meanings in Rousseau's work. The multiple meanings present in Rousseau's text are used to explain the ambiguity of written words. Ambiguity is not seen as writing's problem but rather its function. Derrida then goes on to enunciate how this function is both problematic and necessary. His characterization goes quite strongly against the idea of logos, that ideal of unity between thought and expression that is thought to be available in the presence of speech. Thomas Hardy's poem "I Look Into My Glass" can be used to display the necessary ambiguity of the absent language of writing, and how the interpretative dance is problematized because through textual interaction with the world meaning is endlessly deferred."
Abstract This paper identifies 14 different deconstructive analysis strategies and applies them to Charlotte Bronte's novel "Villette." The paper looks at Bronte's vision of the confusion between appearance and reality and describes deconstructive analysis, and the theory of Jacques Derrida. It also looks at the levels on which the novel can be analyzed.
From the Paper "In Villette Charlotte Bronte exploits the confusion between appearance and reality and the difficulty that its characters especially Lucy have in recognizing both the self and others in order to encode ..."
Tags: Villette, Charlotte Bronte, deconstructive analysis, Derrida
Abstract This paper discusses the issue of discourse and knowledge. The writer examines the works and views of five different philosophers in order to study the subject of discourse and knowing. In this article, the writer discusses the beliefs of Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, C. L. R. James, Audre Lorde and Edward Said in order to examine the relationship between discourse and knowledge.
From the Paper "Several different thinkers, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, C. L. R. James, Audre Lorde and Edward Said all undertook an analysis of the nature and value of discourse and the relationship between forms of discourse and such variables as knowledge and the location of the knowing or the speaking subject. This essay drawing upon the works by these philosophers will examine these relationships, arguing that not only is discourse shaped by knowledge on the part of the speaker and the listener but ... "
Tags: discourse, knowing, philosophy, Derrida, Foucault, C.L.R. James, Lorde, Said
Abstract This paper compares two very different literary theories, neoclassicism and deconstruction and shows that their underlying worldviews are at odds with each other. The opening paragraph states that the writer will try to determine which theory is more useful in the study of literature. The two methods are then described in detail, with quotes from their main apologists, Alexander Pope (neoclassicism) and Jacques Derrida (deconstruction). Deconstruction, a theory that many find hard to understand, is particularly well summarized. After thoroughly presenting the basics of both theories, they are applied to two works of literature ? "Frankenstein", by Mary Shelley and "Psalm 19" in the Bible. The author concludes that while some aspects of deconstruction can be enlightening, the neoclassic theory is much better for analyzing literature.
From the Paper "Jacques Derrida, French critic and philosopher, argues that a science of writing can never exist because a completely coherent system depends on the what he says is the metaphysical possibility of the full presence of certain fundamental elements, while writing in his view "ruptures" full presence and thus makes a coherent system impossible. Derrida then concludes that simplicity should not be given privilege over difference and that the apprehension of full presence in the interior of the individual soul is merely imaginary.
Derrida begins with the statement that the concept of writing should define the field of a science (Derrida 27), and a science of writing, he says, should look for its object at the roots of scientificity. He says that the history of writing would turn back to the origin of historicity and stand as a ..."
Abstract This paper attempts to explain the structuralists' themes which dominated the philosophical thinking in the Twentieth Century and influenced many postmodernists and post-structuralists. As examples, the writer makes reference to the works of Ferdinand Saussaaure, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida and Gilles Deleuz. Post-Structuralism and Postmodernists basically argue that "truth" is relative, it says that language is rooted in culture and its practice, thus it always favors that particular culture. Meaning, on the other hand, is not objective but depends on the experience of the individual.
From the Paper "In the late 1960s the structuralist's movement, which was based in France, attempted to synthesize the ideas of Saussaaure, Freud and Marx. Thinkers like Claude Levi-Strauss and Lacan developed structuralism, which was against the existentialist doctrine, which claimed that man is what he makes himself. For these structuralists the individual is shaped by sociological, psychological and linguistic structures over which he /she has no control, but which could be understood and uncovered by using structuralists methods."
