Reason, logic, philosophy and science are no longer solely sufficient as the royal roads to truth. The relevance of the tradition of negative theology to Derrida's preference for negative descriptions of deconstruction is the notion that a positive description of deconstruction would over-determine the idea of deconstruction and would close off the openness that Derrida wishes to preserve for deconstruction.
The idea of an inscription leads Derrida to the other pole. This danger explains why unconditional openness of the borders is not the best as opposed to what we were calling the worst above ; it is only the less bad or less evil, the less violence.For that, it would be necessary in the future but there will be no future except on this condition to think both the event and the machine as two compatible or even in-dissociable concepts. Overview[ edit ] Jacques Derrida's book Of Grammatology introduced the majority of ideas influential within deconstruction. The logos can be infinite and self present and it does not borrow outside of itself the signifier that it emits and that affects it at the same time. There Descartes says that for a long time he has been making mistakes. Right to Philosophy 2. The book's first half, which includes the celebrated essay on Descartes and Foucault, shows the development of Derrida's method of deconstruction. First, experience as the experience of the present is never a simple experience of something present over and against me, right before my eyes as in an intuition; there is always another agency there. What comes afterward? The conclusion is that we can have no experience that does not essentially and inseparably contain these two agencies of event and repeatability. There is no secret as such; I deny it. Deconstruction according to Derrida[ edit ] Etymology[ edit ] Derrida's original use of the word "deconstruction" was a translation of Destruktion , a concept from the work of Martin Heidegger that Derrida sought to apply to textual reading. The undecidable, for Derrida, is not mere oscillation between two significations. Particularly problematic are the attempts to give neat introductions to deconstruction by people trained in literary criticism who sometimes have little or no expertise in the relevant areas of philosophy that Derrida is working in. And this is what I confide in secret to whomever allies himself to me. Freud engaged in a critique of consciousness and the self identity of the human subject.
Leitch, Vincent B. Writing and Difference reveals the unacknowledged program that makes thought itself possible. Some new philosophy beyond deconstruction would then be required in order to encompass the notion of critique.
Even more important: a difference generally implies positive terms between which the difference is set up; but in language there are only differences without positive terms. Another example would be his Postcard from Socrates to Freud and Beyond; the opening two hundred pages of this book consist of love letters addressed to no one in particular.
Not to put into question again the question, what is death?
Preface to Of Grammatology. Nevertheless, as Derrida constantly stresses, we cannot really identify the friend as such. Not a critique[ edit ] Derrida states that deconstruction is not a critique in the Kantian sense.Faith, perjury, and language are already there in the origin. The one seeks to decipher which is free from the order of the sign, and lives like an exile the necessity of interpretation. Not post-structuralist[ edit ] Derrida states that his use of the word deconstruction first took place in a context in which " structuralism was dominant" and deconstruction's meaning is within this context. Since his death two biographies have appeared Powell and Peeters In the words of Derrida: There are thus two interpretations of interpretation, of structure, of sign, of free play. Keeping a secret includes necessarily auto-affection: I must speak to myself of the secret. Simply, deconstruction is a criticism of Platonism, which is defined by the belief that existence is structured in terms of oppositions separate substances or forms and that the oppositions are hierarchical, with one side of the opposition being more valuable than the other. How would this re-inscription or redefinition of appearance work? His Platonic reflections are inseparably part of his critique of modernity, hence the attempt to be something beyond the modern, because of this Nietzschian sense that the modern has lost its way and become mired in nihilism.
His theory of deconstruction aims at liberating language from the traditional Western concept of text along with ways of dealing with it. Language is dogmatic because it is inescapably metaphysical.A secret is necessarily shared. The violent re-institution of the law means that justice is impossible. To this end, Derrida follows a long line of modern philosophers, who look backwards to Plato and his influence on the Western metaphysical tradition. Thus, complete meaning is always "differential" and postponed in language; there is never a moment when meaning is complete and total. There must be sovereignty, and yet, there can be no use of power without the sharing of it through repetition. If the secret must be necessarily shareable, it is always already shared. Michel Foucault , for instance, famously misattributed to Derrida the very different phrase "Il n'y a rien en dehors du texte" for this purpose. What is happening right now is a kind of event, different from every other now I have ever experienced. Here Derrida speaks of a secret as such. Following Kant but also Husserl and Heidegger , Derrida then is always interested in necessary and foundational conditions of experience. Derrida writes, "Without a doubt, Aristotle thinks of time on the basis of ousia as parousia, on the basis of the now, the point, etc.