It's so interesting to me that people who cannot understand Derrida love to flag just how much they cannot understand Derrida. — Streetlight
Tucker Carlson probably gives his loyal viewers that they are the shrewd, rational minority on this great stage of fools, and this anti-academic anti-fancy-talk vibe fits right in. — igjugarjuk
I guess so. :smirk:I say this as someone who finds value in Kant, Hegel, Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Deleuze, Henry and even Zizek. I think reading Derrida can be enjoyed if it is read as a species of arcane literature ... — Janus
:victory:... there are many scholars inside and outside of philosophy who consider [Derrida's] work to be a prime example of substantive and serious philosophy. I am one of them. — Joshs
Derrida’s notion of deconstruction is not a method but a way of understanding the basis of all methods. And it not an algorithm but a way of understanding how all algorithms deconstruct themselves. — Joshs
The structure of temporality is the basis of all methods , in that it throws us into a world that is already intelligible to us in some way. This familiarity with the world is the basis of method. — Joshs
Any apparent presence, full givenness, or definite meaning has become impossible. How can this project become "a way of understanding the basis of all methods"? — Number2018
Derrida's goal/s with "deconstruction" is one thing, the implications and applicability of what he proposes are quite another thing; and it's the self-refuting nature of the latter – in effect, reducing 'all' truth-making discourses to 'nothing but' tendentious rhetoric – which many critics like me take issue with. — 180 Proof
The term ‘self-refuting’ tips me off to the root of the issue here, which is less about Derrida in particular than about every one of the numerous philosophical discourses thar have appeared over the past 100 year which take their leave from Nietzsche’s
critique of truth — Joshs
I suspect most philosophical discourses in the last twenty-four centuries since Pyrrho of Elis refute themselves either partially or, the case of sophists, completely. — 180 Proof
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.