[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 50 KB, 303x379, Derrida_main.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10310946 No.10310946 [Reply] [Original]

What the FUCK was his problem /lit?

>> No.10310947

Ideology.

>> No.10310949
File: 16 KB, 680x583, 1484974182652.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10310949

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgwOjjoYtco

JUST ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION YOU SHITHEAD

>> No.10310952

>>10310946
Jewishness.

>> No.10310960

>>10310947
>ideology
How's middle school?

>> No.10310972

>>10310946
I thought Signature Event Context was cool, but damn, Derrida, learn to fucking form a sentence properly, dog. How the fuck are you supposed to communicate your ideas if no one can parse what you're writing?

>> No.10310982

>>10310972
>How the fuck are you supposed to communicate your ideas if no one can parse what you're writing?

The bad writing is on purpose because of deconstruction or something

>> No.10310989

>>10310946
AESTHETIC
E
S
T
H
E
T
I
C

>> No.10310995

>>10310982
His writing is demonstrating the method of deconstruction.
It's like how Deleuze and Gauttari are demonstrating the rhizome and schizoanalysis in their writing so it doesn't make comprehension easy as comprehension if not their primary aim.

>> No.10311009

>>10310946
Why do you say he had a problem? Please prove he had a problem, or tell us about YOUR fucking problem. Tinybrain.

>> No.10311014

>>10310960
What is that supposed to mean? Derrida deconstructed seemingly abstract ideologies to highlight that they were bound and somewhat determined by socio-political, ecenomic, and cultural factors. He grounded theories in their time and place. Derridas problem was ideology and he attacked it effectively.

>> No.10311015

>>10311009
I don't know if I hate poltards or obvious rabbitors like you more.

>> No.10311020

>>10311015
You don't hate me.

>> No.10311022

>>10310949
>begins answering the question by demonstrating one of the fundamental moves of deconstruction
God damn Derrida is awesome. He's always doing this shit, where not only is the philosophy contained within the content of his writing or response, but the structure of work itself is doing philosophy. There's a great essay he wrote
as part of a collection to be presented to Levinas as a gift towards the end of his life (Adieu to Levinas...Levinas might have been dead already actually). Levinas had a thing about gift-giving though where he says that true respect for the other requires ingratitude. So what does Derrida do? He intentionally misreads Levinas in certain places as a sign of ingratitude, thereby showing his true respect for Levinas as a thinker. Of course this is an interpretation you could only see if you already knew Levinas and recognized the context of the writing, which is so often the case with Derrida. But the man was insanely smart and creative

>> No.10311023

>>10311014
Thought you meant he was ideologically-driven. I saw your comment in the milieu of teenage Zizek-posting

>> No.10311040

>>10310972
People can parse out what he's saying though. Which is why there's so much excellent secondary literature on Derrida, much of which breaks down the ideas into something more palatable. But maybe not all writing is intended to be written for the layperson. Don't you think there should be some room for writing that's geared toward fellow academics who are also extremely well studied in the history of philosophy? Or should everything be written at a level that an undergrad can look over a few times and get? And shouldn't there also be room for people to experiment with style? He has an early work on Husserl that's fairly straightforward and easy to understand, so he could clearly write that way.

>> No.10311669

>>10311023
He was ideologically driven to destroy ideology.

>> No.10311741

>>10310972
>reads a translation
>tells the writer to learn how to form a sentence
You fail to think things through often, dont you?

>> No.10311933

>>10310946
The contingency of linguistic signs desu

>> No.10311938

>>10311040
>Don't you think there should be some room for writing that's geared toward fellow academics who are also extremely well studied in the history of philosophy?
Only if that is literally the only way it can be expressed. Academics shouldn't seek t turn their fields in to exclusive circlejerks.

>> No.10312395

>>10310946
he was circumcised

>> No.10312539

I see him as the Hitler of philosophy.