[atreestump]

I would like to see it anyway!

[atreestump]

Just got myself a copy of ‘Gender Trouble’ by Judith Butler. I’m interested in Butlers’ ‘performative turn’ which links her to Foucault, as well as Queer Theory, which may shed more light on Derrida.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[atreestump]

I’m on Chapter 6 of the Derrida Critical Reader….Chapter 4 I found a little difficult if I’m honest, all that talk of the spectre and ‘the experience of the impossible’…hopefully this will make more sense as I progress….Chapter 5 is where I think it gets interesting when he tackles Derrida’s investigation of ‘the supplement’ in Rousseau and how it relates it to the on-going construction of the ‘l’ and formation of identity….as ‘we are (always) (still) to be invented’…..Chapter 6 addresses that often misunderstood comment by Derrida that ‘there is nothing outside of the text’ which has been touched on earlier in your forum…here it looks at Derrida’s criticism of the linguistic turn in Structuralism, and concentrates more on what he calls the ‘other of language’ which is the true focus of deconstruction…this is where he employs the use of ‘the mark’ rather than the text or language…which is prelinguistic, I think this links in with what he is trying to tease out in Chapter 4

[atreestump]

Twas a good documentary, passionate guy.

[atreestump]

I’m nearly at the end of Chapter Four, as i re-read everything.

[atreestump]

I read your bio and that’s what made me think of it.

[atreestump]

It’s always a very practical section to have on any forum. When we get more members, I’m sure the most creative ones will stay on here for a while.

I have been on it all day and every day.

[atreestump]

I’m just at Chapter 4, my only advice at this moment would be to read and digest

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh, ok. I thought we were going to discuss each chapter, so I was holding back on chapter 1.

I will resume.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[atreestump]

I think the question here then is based on what specific phenomenon we are talking about, then. And perhaps how human?

The phenomenon is human.
[hr]
What Quine says at the end reminds me of Donald Davidsons’ ‘Principle of Charity’, that we must assume that who we are speaking to is rational.

[atreestump]

philosophy has studied epistemology, the organization of knowledge and the like better.

True, but Heidegger defines the role of philosophy as phenomenological ontology, his analysis is not Cartesian, which places epistemology as first philosophy.

letting what shows itself to be seen from itself, just as it shows from itself.

[atreestump]

Have you any thoughts so far? Anything to guide us with?;)
[hr]
I see it opens with the problem of how to respond to a question, ‘Why Derrida?’ and it immediately focuses on the presupposition that we know Derrida is not an energy drink, or a prospective location for the Olympic games. Then ‘Why Derrida?’ is in quotes, but it already was.

So already there’s deontic demands, presuppostions and the review of time, how a text appears present, but is in the past. Reflecting on Being and Time, which was like reading an experience ‘horizon’, where objects pop up and then we magnify them, zoom in and take a really close look at them. In this text, it is focusing on sentences, the structure of the sentences. The question of deciding comes in, how do we decide what goes in quotes?

My impression is that there are two processes at work at any moment, but the one we experience is not actually ‘the present’, quotation seems to be used whenever something is not the whole fact, it’s never complete, there’s always something to add on to it. Quotes are always ‘past’.

I’m trying to bear in mind that Derrida is a process philosopher and that the text is all that is the case.

[atreestump]

Yeah, it was just a thumbing through. Looks good though.

[atreestump]

Great stuff, I just had a peek at it and it says what we expected. They come down on Wittgensteins side, so I am looking at it as a way into Wittgenstein mostly.

[atreestump]

It’s arrived! Finally, we can read this together at some point!

[atreestump]

Been re-reading this awesome book. This has given me lots of scope, philosophy-wise.

[Author]

Posts