/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20919214]

Poststructuralism, or deconstruction, formulated by Jacques Derrida (1930–2004), holds that culture is created and can therefore be analyzed in a variety of ways, according to the manner in which people create their own meaning. Hence there is no fixed truth or universal meaning.

[Anonymous No.20919239]

>>20919214
pseud bullshit

[Anonymous No.20919244]

>>20919214
Yeah this is the one philosophical posture that managed to be even more pozzed and retarded than fucking existentialism (!). French theorists of the 70s were something else, man. I mean this guy and Foucault were pretty much responsible for ushering the terminal age of western civilizational and cultural collapse and they still get academic praise to this day. At least Deleuze and Guattari did it right because when you read between the lines you realize they were warning against all of this bullshit all along. Baudrillard too.

[Anonymous No.20919301]

>>20919239
THIS

can someone in this thread explain to me in plain english what does "writing precedes speech" mean? And why does writing precedes speech?

[Anonymous No.20919311]

>>20919301
Speech has a meaning I guess? Writing is a lexicon and system of signs and meanings. When we use it we have our speech.

Just a guess. Doesn't seem too hard to understand if you know what his philosophy is about.

[Anonymous No.20919314]

>>20919214
that isnt entirely accurate, that which is deconstructed (aka western metaphysics) has a trascendent formal structure that allows it to be deconstructed, but this structure can never be aprehended as such in its totality, because such a theory (like Heidegger in being and time) would go beyond totality, inserting itself in a new totality or making the former incomplete and therefor not a totality, this is what it means when he says you cant go outside the text
this metaphysical totality and its trascendent structure is what posibilitates knowledge and truth, in an analog way as the kantian trascendental subject did. Both have in common to be very obscure, but Derrida outright declares impossible to know this formal structure that trascends being
You guys are too retarded to realize it but this guy was way more conservative and moderate than Nietzsche or Foucault and Deleuze

[Anonymous No.20919326]

>>20919301
Merely a fruitless inversion of related concepts for easy academic clout. It does not mean anything except for the pretense that it somehow creates meaning out of thin air, which it even fails to do. Exact same trickery with Sartre and his "existence precedes essence" which is probably the most untrue sentence that has ever been written in the whole history of western thought. Classic hegelian obscurantist dialectic trap but with none of the tragic romanticism of the germans. Truly French philosophy is the saddest and emptiest meeting of pseuds ever conceived, even more vacuous than anglos. Only Cioran and Merleau-Ponty escape this blackhole of bottomless mediocrity.

[Anonymous No.20919357]

>>20919326
>existence precedes essence" which is probably the most untrue sentence that has ever been written in the whole history of western thought
lmao this nigga still sucking on aristotle's dusty ass penis after +2000 years

[Anonymous No.20919367]

>>20919357
Dude I don't care about this antique pseud who was btfo'd by Plato in every conceptual direction. If you ironically subscribe to any existentialist tenet you are a midwit and an intellectual fraud and you should honestly be very ashamed of yourself

[Anonymous No.20919384]

>>20919367
>Dude I don't care about this antique pseud who was btfo'd by Plato in every conceptual direction.
very based
>If you ironically subscribe to any existentialist tenet you are a midwit and an intellectual fraud and you should honestly be very ashamed of yourself
I really don't but I'm getting a feeling you consider Heidegger an existentialist

[Anonymous No.20919402]

>>20919384
Well Heidegger might be first and foremost considered a phenomenologist, he is widely considered the most influential existentialist of the twentieth century. Maybe Sartre and Camus are more discussed nowadays but he came first and influenced them heavily along with Husserl.

[Anonymous No.20919419]

>>20919239
fpbp

[Anonymous No.20919425]

>>20919402
he is not an existencialist

[Anonymous No.20919426]

>>20919367
this is indeed the standard internet pseudlord meme opinion, be happy yoyu're able to adopt such generic postures

[Anonymous No.20919468]

>>20919426
dude existentialism has always been the memelord opinion throughout the entirety of the cultural and intellectual discourse. Don't try such a pathetic inversion on me. Plato fucks your ass 2600 years after the fact and you can't do anything about it lol
>>20919425
He is regarded as the foremost of them all. Towering above Kierkegaard and Schopenhauer alike within the realm of academia. He's pretty much the existentialist supreme (which is why he should be disrespected and called a fraud at all times but after all that's just like, my opinion man)

[Anonymous No.20919474]

>>20919468
>Plato fucks your ass 2600 years after the fact and you can't do anything about it lol
just because he fucks your ass doesn't mean he fucks my ass, but thank for illuminating something of your manner of relation to your favorite writers

[Anonymous No.20919511]

>>20919474
Another powerless inversion I see. It's never too late to accept the reality of essentialism anon. You don't even have to think, you just have to see.

[Anonymous No.20919524]

>>20919511
>You don't even have to think, you just have to don the wizard's garb in the 130iq range of midwit chart
fixed

[Anonymous No.20919544]

>>20919314
>Plato claims you can know it (Form of the Good), but it's a revelatory experience after basically a lifetime of strenuous physical, mathematical, and dialectical work
>every other pseud that comes after him claims that it is impossible, yet still expect to be understood
hmmm...

[Anonymous No.20919548]

>>20919524
I mean yeah now that you say it your IQ is probably inferior to mine but that's not even the point. Instinctive knowledge is superior and deep down you already know it, I'm not teaching you anything new.

[Anonymous No.20919553]

>>20919544
Hermetic and based. Pseuds who get filtered by Plato should just read Guénon and disappear from this board instead of defending the undefendable. Every book is freely available on the internet, there are no excuses anymore

[Anonymous No.20919569]

>>20919244
>At least Deleuze and Guattari did it right because when you read between the lines you realize they were warning against all of this bullshit all along.
Isn't it funny how you can say shit like this despite the fact that you haven't read any of the authors mentioned in this thread?
Pretty funny.

[Anonymous No.20919572]

>>20919548
Completely meaningless statement, since so many types of instincts would be disqualified leaving only something qualified by other than instinct (f.ex instincts of people with perceptual abnormalities of any kind).

[Anonymous No.20919583]

>>20919569
Yeah it's actually really funny because you're the first person today to directly call me out on my bullshit. This board is so infested by actual pseudos that no one can reliably detect them anymore. Such a shame.
Maybe that's what you wanted to hear? You should go and reread them then, because it looks like you haven't understood them.

>>20919572
Honest effort but you imply that instinctual knowledge is somehow contingent on other categories to reliably be considered the "right" kind of instinct from which it proceeds. Which is really not how it works. Again read Guénon I'll not do all the work for you

[Anonymous No.20919594]

>>20919583
>Honest effort but you imply that instinctual knowledge is somehow contingent on other categories to reliably be considered the "right" kind of instinct from which it proceeds. Which is really not how it works
I just explained why: there's a plurality of instincts, you won't accept them all as equal, therefore you are really talking about some subclass of information which is possible to be acquired instinctually, to be sure, but in light of the instinctual plurality must be grounded in other terms if you do not wish to accept every instinct by every man as an equal form of knowledge. It is bizarre to me that you sound like an extreme Nietzschean/postmodernist while claiming Plato.

[Anonymous No.20919598]

>>20919544
revelation knowledge isnt the same as discursive, theoric, and deductive knowledge

[Anonymous No.20919614]

>>20919594
Except there is not such a thing as a plurality of instincts. There is one superior way of acquiring supratemporal and metaphysical knowledge of this universe and regardless of the path you take, the instinct you achieve in the end is in essence the same as if you had taken another path. As they say, so above, as below.

[Anonymous No.20919650]

>>20919614
>Except there is not such a thing as a plurality of instincts.
Completely absurd, since if this were true, there would be nothing to learn due to the lack of presence of any contrasting instincts that would need to be overcome to achieve the correct instinct. And what's more, there's no way to know for sure that one instinct is the only correct one, and simultaenously disclosing of or appreciation of its correctness would not, at least necessarily, be part of the revealed form as it presents itself

[Anonymous No.20919670]

>>20919598
Correct. It's something beyond that. The next state. What I described does not contradict with what you said.

[Anonymous No.20919673]

>>20919650
>if this were true, there would be nothing to learn
You are beginning to see for yourself. Behold : there is nothing to learn, nothing to realize, nothing to experience. Such is the Way.
>there's no way to know for sure that one instinct is the only correct one
False inquiry for there is but one instinct. Your facades and illusions vanish before the lifting of the veil. Mere words suffice not, practice is needed for you to further your awakening. This post >>20917898 is an introduction to what I'm trying to talk about. The Advaita Vedānta is the key to resolving the contradictions you form in your untrained mind.

[Anonymous No.20919698]

>>20919673
>You are beginning to see for yourself. Behold : there is nothing to learn, nothing to realize, nothing to experience. Such is the Way.
You're still trying to correct me, anyhow, as if I had some wrong instincts, in some way. If you say that whole process is what IS, we're still closer to, say, a Heraclitean flux than the platonic forms.
>False inquiry for there is but one instinct. Your facades and illusions vanish before the lifting of the veil.
yeah yeah ok
im not of course adverse to reading something by guenon but you should realize that this sort of rhetoric isn't effective

[Anonymous No.20919735]

>>20919214
You can interpret a baseball bat however much you want. That doesn’t change the truth that when someone swings one at you it’s gonna fucking hurt.

[Anonymous No.20919760]

>>20919670
>The next state.
Its actually the same state the moment you talk about it in predicative languaje and bring it into presence. Now it has been asimilated as a notion into discursive languaje.

[Anonymous No.20919766]

>>20919468
>He is regarded as the foremost of them all.
Only by casuals

[Anonymous No.20920689]

>>20919214
>Poststructuralism, or deconstruction,
stopped reading here

[Anonymous No.20920728]

>>20919214
Yes.