DOCSLIB.ORG

Bibliography

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bibliography Bibliography Aristotle. (1941). Metaphysics, Physics. In The Basic Works of Aristotle. Richard McKeon. (Ed.). New York, NY: Random House. Attridge, Derek (Ed.). (1992). Acts of Literature. London and NY: Routledge. Augustine, St. (2006). Confessions. Indianapolis: Hackett. Bacon, Francis. (1960). The New Organon and Related Writings. New York: Prentice-Hall. Baker, Lynne Rudder. (2000). Metaphysics of Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Baldwin, Thomas. (2008). “Presence, Truth and Authenticity.” In S.Glendenning & R. Eaglestone. (Eds.), Derrida’s Legacies Literature and Philosophy (pp. 107-17). New York: Routledge. Bennington, Geoffrey. (2000). Interrupting Derrida. London: Routledge. Berman, Art. (1988).From the New Criticism to Deconstruction. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Bernasconi, Robert. (1989). “Seeing Double: Destruktion and Deconstruction.” In D. Michelfelder (Ed.), Dialogue and Deconstruction The Gadamer-Derrida Encounter (pp. 233-50). Albany: SUNY Press. Brann, Eva T. H. (1991). The World of the Imagination. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Caputo, John D. (1989). “Gadamer’s Closet Essentialism: A Derridean Critique.” In D. Michelfelder (Ed.), Dialogue and Deconstruction The Gadamer-Derrida Encounter (pp. 258-64). Albany: SUNY Press. ________. (1993). “In Search of the Quasi-Transcendental: The Case of Derrida and Rorty.” In G. Madison (Ed.). Working through Derrida (pp. 147-69). Evanston: Northwestern University Press. ________. (1997). Deconstruction in a Nutshell: A Conversation with Jacques Derrida. New York: Fordham University Press. Chalmers, David, D. Manley, R. Wasserman (Eds.). (2009). Metametaphysics New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Churchland, Paul. (2013). Matter and Consciousness. 3rd. Ed. Cambridge: MIT Press. Cohen, Tom (Ed.). (2001). Jacques Derrida and the Humanities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cornell, Drucilla, M. Rosenfeld, D. G. Carlson (Eds.). (1997). Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice. New York: Routledge. Critchley, Simon. (1992). The Ethics of Deconstruction Derrida & Levinas. Oxford: Blackwell. Culler, Jonathan. (1983). On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism. London: Routledge. Dasenbrock, Reed Way. (Ed.). (1989). Redrawing the Lines: Analytic Philosophy, Deconstruction, and Literary Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Daylight, Russell. (2011). What if Derrida was wrong about Saussure? Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Dennett, Daniel. (1991). Explaining Consciousness. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. Derrida, Jacques. (1967a). La Voix et le Phénomène. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. ________. (1967b). De la Grammatologie. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit ________. (1967c). L’écriture et la Différence. Paris: Éditions du Seuil ________. (1973). Speech and Phenomena. Translated by Allison, David B. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. ________. (1976). Of Grammatology. Translated by Spival, Gayatri Chakravorty. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ________. (1981). Positions. Translated by Bass, Alan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ________. (1982). Margins of Philosophy. Translated by Bass, Alan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 322 Bibliography ________. (1987). “Some questions and responses.” In N. Fabb & D. Attridge (Eds). The Linguistics of Writing (pp. 252-64). New York: Methuen. ________. (1988). Limited Inc. Translated by Weber, Samuel. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. ________. (1992).“This strange institution called literature.” In D. Attridge (Ed.). (1992). Acts of Literature (pp. 33-75). London and NY: Routledge. ________. (2001).“As if it were possible, “within such limits”...”. In M. Meyer (Ed.). (2001). Questioning Derrida: With His Replies on Philosophy (pp. 96-119). Aldershot: Ashgate. ________. (2002a) Negotiations. E. Rottenberg (Ed.). Stanford: Stanford University Press. ________. (2002b). Who’s Afraid of Philosophy? Translated by Plug, Jan. Stanford: Stanford University Press. ________. (2004). “Deconstruction and the Other.” In R. Kearney (Ed.). (2004). Debates in Continental Philosophy (pp. 139-56). New York: Fordham University Press. ________. (2007). Psyche Inventions of the Other, Vol. 1. P. Kamuf, P. & E. Rottenberg (Eds.). (2007). Stanford: Stanford University Press. Descombes, Vincent. (2002). “Difference.” In Z. Direk & L. Lawlor (Eds.). (2002). Jacques Derrida Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. (pp. 30-43, Vol III). Vol. II, III. London & New York: Routledge. Dewey, John. (1958). Experience and Nature. 2d ed. New York: Dover. Direk, Zeynep & Lawlor, Leonard. (Eds.). (2002). Jacques Derrida Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. Vols II, III. London & New York: Routledge. Ellis, John M. (1989). Against Deconstruction. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Evans, J. Claude. (1991). Strategies of Deconstruction Derrida and the Myth of the Voice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Fabb, Nigel and Attridge, Derek. (Eds). (1987). The Linguistics of Writing. New York: Methuen. Farrell, Frank B. (1988). “Iterability and Meaning: The Searle-Derrida Debate.” Metaphilosophy, 23, 53-64. Fynsk, Christopher. (2001). “Derrida and Philosophy: Acts of Engagement.” In T. Cohen (Ed.). (2001). Jacques Derrida and the Humanities (pp. 152-71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gadamer, Hans-Georg. (1989). “Letter to Dahlmeyer.” In D. Michelfelder & R. Palmer (Eds.). (1989). Dialogue and Deconstruction The Gadamer-Derrida Encounter (pp. 93-101). Albany: SUNY Press. Gasché, R. (1986). The Tain of the Mirror: Derrida and the Philosophy of Reflection. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ________. (1989). “Infrastructures and Systematicity.” In J. Sallis (Ed.). (1989). Deconstruction and Philosophy (pp. 3-20). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Glendinning, Simon & Eaglestone, Robert. (Eds). (2008). Derrida’s Legacies Literature and Philosophy. New York: Routledge. Habermas, Jürgen. (1987). The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Translated by Lawrence, Frederick. Cambridge: MIT Press. Haddad, Samir. (2013). Derrida and the Inheritance of Democracy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Harvey, Irene. (1986). Derrida and the Economy of Différance. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Hill, Leslie. (2007). The Cambridge Introduction to Jacques Derrida. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hobson, Marian. (1998). Jacques Derrida Opening Lines. London: Routledge. Hodge, Joanna. (2007). Derrida on Time. New York: Routledge. Bibliography 323 Hume, David. (1993). An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Steinberg, E. (Ed.). 2d ed. Indianapolis: Hackett. Kearney, Richard. (Ed.). (2004).Debates in Continental Philosophy. New York: Fordham University Press. Keller, Catherine, & Daniell, Anne. (Eds). (2002). Process and Difference: Between Cosmological and Postructuralist Post Modernisms. Albany: State University of New York Press. Kirk, G.S. & Raven, J. E. (1957). The Presocratic Philosophers. Cambridge: University Press. Lawlor, Leonard. (2002). Derrida and Husserl: The Basic Problem of Phenomenology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Leibniz, G. W. (1991). Discourse on Metaphysics and other Essays. Translated by Garber, Daniel & Ariew, Roger. Indianapolis: Hackett. Lucy, Niall. (1995). Debating Derrida. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press. Macdonald, Cynthia. (2005). Varieties of Things: Foundations of Contemporary Metaphysics. Oxford: Blackwell. Madison, Gary. (Ed.). (1993). Working through Derrida. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. Marder, Michael. (2009). The Event of the Thing Derrida’s Post-deconstructive Realism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Marrati, Paola. (2005). Genesis and Trace Derrida Reading Husserl and Heidegger. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Martinich, Aloysius P. (1984). Communication and Reference. Berlin: de Gruyter. Meyer, Michel. (Ed.). (2001). Questioning Derrida: With His Replies on Philosophy. Aldershot: Ashgate. Michelfelder, Diane P. & Palmer, Richard E. (Eds.). (1989). Dialogue and Deconstruction The Gadamer-Derrida Encounter. Albany: SUNY Press. Miller, J. Hillis. (2002). “Derrida’s Others.” In Z. Direk & L. Lawlor (Eds.). (2002). Jacques Derrida Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. Vols II, III. (pp. 325-39). London & New York: Routledge. Mitchell, W. J. T. (1985). Against Theory Literary Studies and the New Pragmatism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mouffe, Chantal. (Ed.). (1996). Deconstruction and Pragmatism. London: Routledge. Naas, Michael. (2003). Taking on the Tradition Jacques Derrida and the Legacies of Deconstruction. Stanford: Stanford University Press. ________. (2008). “Derrida’s America.” In S. Glendinning & R. Eaglestone (Eds.). (2008). Derrida’s Legacies Literature and Philosophy (pp. 118-37). New York: Routledge. ________. (2012). Miracle and Machine: Jacques Derrida and the Two Sources of Religion, Science, and the Media. Bronx, NY: Fordham University Press. Norris, Christopher. (1983). The Deconstructive Turn: Essays in the Rhetoric of Philosophy. London: Methuen. ________. (1989). “‘Philosophy is Not Just a Kind of Writing’: Derrida and the Claim of Reason.” In R. W. Dasenbrock (Ed.). Redrawing the Lines: Analytic Philosophy, Deconstruction, and Literary Theory (pp. 189-203). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ________. (1990). What’s Wrong with Postmodernism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ________. (2001). “Deconstruction, Ontology, and Philosophy of Science: Derrida on Aristotle.” In
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Unlimited Responsibility of Spilling Ink Marko Zlomislic
    ISSN 1393-614X Minerva - An Internet Journal of Philosophy 11 (2007): 128-152 ____________________________________________________ The Unlimited Responsibility of Spilling Ink Marko Zlomislic Abstract In order to show that both Derrida’s epistemology and his ethics can be understood in terms of his logic of writing and giving, I consider his conversation with Searle in Limited Inc. I bring out how a deconstruction that is implied by the dissemination of writing and giving makes a difference that accounts for the creative and responsible decisions that undecidability makes possible. Limited Inc has four parts and I will interpret it in terms of the four main concepts of Derrida. I will relate signature, event, context to Derrida’s notion of dissemination and show how he differs from Austin and Searle concerning the notion of the signature of the one who writes and gives. Next, I will show how in his reply to Derrida, entitled, “Reiterating the Differences”, Searle overlooks Derrida’s thought about the communication of intended meaning that has to do with Derrida’s distinction between force and meaning and his notion of differance. Here I will show that Searle cannot even follow his own criteria for doing philosophy. Then by looking at Limited Inc, I show how Derrida differs from Searle because repeatability is alterability. Derrida has an ethical intent all along to show that it is the ethos of alterity that is called forth by responsibility and accounted for by dissemination and difference. Of course, comments on comments, criticisms of criticisms, are subject to the law of diminishing fleas, but I think there are here some misconceptions still to be cleared up, some of which seem to still be prevalent in generally sensible quarters.
    [Show full text]
  • Derrida's Open and Its Closure: the Aporia of Différance and the Only
    Language, Literature, and Interdisciplinary Studies (LLIDS) ISSN: 2547-0044 http://ellids.com/archives/2018/09/2.1-Wu.pdf CC Attribution-No Derivatives 4.0 International License www.ellids.com Derrida’s Open and Its Closure: The Aporia of Différance and the Only Logic of Thinking Mengxue Wu “…for an opening is relative to a ‘surrounding plenitude.’”1 “The gallery is the labyrinth which includes in itself its own exits: we have never come upon it as upon a particular case of experience—that which Husserl believes he is describing.”2 Metaphysics—the entire history of metaphysics has been considered as the metaphysics of presence—is closed; it is closed like a dead end. In its “surrounding plenitude” no exit can be found and it is meeting its own death. Though a system of philosophy with incompleteness is not a perfect theory, but the rebuke of how comprehensive and close a philosophy is and the demand of that philosophy to open its house to the alien and the ungraspable would be a preposterous importunity. However, upon the stage where the entire history of Western philosophy has been played, “…nothing is staged or displayed theatrically. Rather, the battle of the new gods against the old is being fought” (Heidegger 22). This battle, between the new gods and the old, between the new thoughts and the old, is a battle of breaking into new ruptures and finding new openings in the old thoughts. At the moment when traditional philosophy has become a closure of the metaphysics of presence, even those streams of thought that already broke new phenomenological grounds in the beginning of twentieth century and Levinas’s ethical breaking are closed “as the self-presence in absolute knowledge” (Derrida 102, SP).
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Derrida's Critique of Husserl and the Philosophy
    5 DERRIDA’S CRITIQUE OF HUSSERL AND THE PHILOSOPHY OF PRESENCE David B. Allison* Now would be the time to reject the myths of inductivity and of the Wesenschau, which are transmitted, as points of honor, from generation to generation. ...Am I primitively the power to contemplate, a pure look which fixes the things in their temporal and local place and the essences in an invisible heaven; am I this ray of knowing that would have to 1 arise from nowhere? SÍNTESE – O autor reexamina a crítica de Derrida ABSTRACT – The author reexamines Derrida’s à fenomenologia de Husserl de forma a mostrar critique of Husserl’s phenomenology, so as to como a sua coerência estrutural emerge não show how its structural coherency arises not so tanto de uma redução a uma doutrina particular, much from the reduction to a particular doctrine, mas antes das exigências de uma concepção but rather from the demands of a unitary concep- unitária, especificamente impostas pelas deter- tion, specifically from the demands imposed by minações epistemológicas e metafísicas da the epistemological and metaphysical determina- presença. tions of presence. PALAVRAS-CHAVE – Desconstrução. Derrida. KEY WORDS – Deconstruction. Derrida. Husserl. Fenomenologia. Husserl. Presença. Significado. Meaning. Phenomenology. Presence. * Doutor. Professor, State University of New York, Stony Brook, EUA. 1 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Le Visible et l’invisible (Paris: Editions Gallimard, 1964), Eng. tr., Alphonso Lingis, The Visible and the Invisible (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1968). pp. 113-116. VERITAS Porto Alegre v. 50 n. 1 Março 2005 p. 89-99 It is practically a truism to say that most of Husserl’s commentators have in- sisted on the rigorously systematic character of his writings.
    [Show full text]
  • Speech and Phenomena and Other Essays on Husservs Theory of Signs
    Jacques Derrida Translated, with an Introduction, by Preface by Speech and Phenomena And Other Essays on HusserVs Theory of Signs DAVID B. ALLISON NEWTON GARVER NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY PRESS EVANSTON 19 7 3 Copyright © 1973 by Northwestern University Press All rights reserved library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 72-80565 ISBN 0-8101-0397-4 Printed in the United States of America Speech and Phenomena was originally published in French under the title La Voix et le Phinomene, copyright © 1967 by Presses Uni- versitaires de France. "Form and Meaning" appeared in French under the title "La Forme et le vouloir-dire: Note sur la ph6nom6nologie du langage," in the Revue internaHonale de philosophic, Volume LXXXI (1967). "Differance" appeared in French under the tide "La Difference" in the Bulletin de la Society fran^aise de philosophie, Volume LX1I (1968) and was reprinted in ^Thiorie d'ensembte, a collection of essays published by Editions du Seuil in 1968. Quotations from the following works of Edmund Husserl are used by permission of the publishers: Logical Investigations, translated by J. N. Findlay. Copyright © 1970 by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, London, and Humanities Press, Inc., New York, Ideas, translated by W. R. Boyce Gibson. Copyright © 1931 by George Allen & Unwin Ltd, London, and Humanities Press, Inc., New York. Jacques Derrida is Professor of Philosophy at the Ecole Normale Sup&ieure of the University of Paris. David B. Allison is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the State Uni• versity of New York at Stony Brook. Contents
    [Show full text]
  • LEVINAS on LAW a Derridean Reading of Manderson's Proximity, Levinas, and the Soul of Law
    LEVINAS ON LAW A Derridean Reading of Manderson's Proximity, Levinas, and the Soul of Law Jacques de Ville* In this article, Desmond Manderson's book, Proximity, Levinas, and the Soul of Law (2006), is analysed specifically with reference to the accuracy with which it translates Derrida's thinking into law. Manderson, in a number of instances, invokes Derrida's thinking as a 'corrective' to that of Levinas. The author shows that this invocation by Manderson of Derrida's texts is selective and does not take account of Derrida's broader 'philosophical' approach. The author points to the differences between, but also the correspondence in the thinking of, Levinas and Derrida. He contends that being true to Derrida's thinking requires that proximity be viewed not as simply making law responsive as proposed by Manderson, but as having a paradoxical structure. The latter would give expression to the distinction that Derrida draws between the conditional and the unconditional. Only if proximity is viewed in this manner will judges be faced with a true responsibility in deciding negligence cases; only then will justice stand a chance. Introduction Translating Levinas into law is not a task that many legal scholars undertake. There are, however, a number of scholars who in recent years have made admirable attempts to do so.1 In this article, I reflect on some of the difficulties involved in translating Levinas into law through a 'Derridean' reading of the recently published book of Desmond Manderson, Proximity, Levinas, and the Soul of Law. This book makes a valuable attempt at translating a number of Professor of Law, University of the Western Cape.
    [Show full text]
  • The Science of Writing
    The Science of Writing Introduction In 1967 the French philosopher, Jacques Derrida, published in book form a collection of texts he had been composing, under the title De la Grammatologie, Of Grammatology.1 The book was translated into English in 1974 by Gayatri Spivak and, with its one-hundred-page translator’s introduction, constituted the first major introduction to Derrida for English-speaking audiences. In 1985 an American professor of English Literature, Gregory Ulmer, published his engagement with Derrida under the title, Applied Grammatology: Post(e) Pedagogy from Jacques Derrida to Joseph Beuys.2 Ulmer’s investigation is one of the very few instances where Derrida’s mention of ‘grammatology’ is taken up at length. In July 2008, at the Derrida Today conference held at the University of Sydney, in Australia, the French Derrida scholar, Catherine Malabou, presented a key note address that probed the fate of Derrida’s notion of ‘grammatology’ and how its question might be re-engaged or re-invented today.3 By ‘grammatology,’ Derrida inferred a ‘science of writing,’ though an approach to the question of writing that radically engages with the question of science, of truth and of knowing. And if Ulmer activates the question posed by grammatology, it is in order to question a scene of teaching the radically questions writing as such. This paper aims at asking if the work of Derrida and Ulmer has continued relevance for a radicalising of the scene of teaching precisely by a critical engagement with what we commonly name as writing and what we commonly understand as its agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Thinking the Concept Otherwise: Deleuze and Expression
    Thinking the Concept Otherwise: Deleuze and Expression PETER COOK University o/Sydney ABSTRACT: In What is Philosophy?, Deleuze and Guattari think the concept of concept otherwise. In keeping with Deleuze 's professed empiricism, he and Guattari study various concepts and 'extract' a new concept ofthe concept. This constructive method does not illuminate how and why their proposed concept diffors from the traditional. This paper considers how Deleuze and Guattari 's concept does differ, as afirst step towards arriving at some evaluation oftheir analysis. REsUME: Dans Qu' est-ce que la philosophie?, Deleuze et Guattari pensent Ie concept autrement. Tout en s 'en tenant aI 'empirisme avoue de Deleuze, ce dernier et Guattari analysent differents concepts et en 'extraient' un nouveau concept de concept. Cette methode constructive n 'eclaire cependant pas comment et pourquoi Ie concept qu 'ils proposent di.ffere du concept traditionnel. Apres avoir considere la faryon dont Ie concept de Deleuze et Guattari di.ffere en effit de l'acception traditionnelle, cet article pourra se pencher sur la question de I 'evaluation de leur analyse. " ... one can ... think ... the concept of concept otherwise ... "l In What is Philosophy?, Deleuze and Guattari think the concept of concept otherwise. In keeping with Deleuze's professed empiricism, he and Guattari study various concepts and 'extract' a new concept of the concept. This constructive method does not illuminate how and why their proposed concept differs from the traditional. In this paper I consider how Deleuze and Guattari's concept does differ, as a first step towards arriving at some evaluation of their analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Education As the Possibility of Justice: Jacques Derrida
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 422 198 SO 028 563 AUTHOR Biesta, Gert J. J. TITLE Education as the Possibility of Justice: Jacques Derrida. PUB DATE 1997-03-00 NOTE 35p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Chicago, IL, March 24-28, 1997). PUB TYPE Reports - Descriptive (141) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150) EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Educational Philosophy; *Educational Theories; Epistemology; Hermeneutics; Higher Education; *Justice; *Philosophy IDENTIFIERS *Derrida (Jacques); Poststructuralism ABSTRACT This paper is an analysis of the ongoing work of philosopher Jacques Derrida and the immense body of work associated with him. Derrida's copious work is difficult to categorize since Derrida challenges the very concept that meaning can be grasped in its original moment or that meaning can be represented in the form of some proper, self-identical concept. Derrida's "deconstruction" requires reading, writing, and translating Derrida, an impossibility the author maintains cannot be done because translation involves transformation and the originality of the original only comes into view after it has been translated. The sections of the paper include: (1) "Preface: Reading Derrida, Writing after Derrida"; (2) "Curriculum Vitae"; (3) "(No) Philosophy"; (4) "The Myth of the Origin"; (5) "The Presence of the Voice"; (6) "The Ubiquity of Writing"; (7) "Difference and 'Differance'"; (8) "Deconstruction and the Other"; (9) "Education"; (10) "Education beyond Representation: Gregory Ulmer's 'Post(e)-pedagogy"; and (11) "Afterword: Education as the Possibility of Justice." (EH) ******************************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. * ******************************************************************************** Education as the Possibility of Justice: Jacques Derrida.
    [Show full text]
  • 145 a Derrida Bibliography Compiled by JOHN LEAVEY and DAVID B
    A Derrida Bibliography Compiled by JOHN LEAVEY and DAVID B. ALLISON A. FRENCH AND ENGLISH WORKS BY JACQUES DERRIDA I. Books by Derrida 1962: Translation and Introduction to Edmund Husserl, L'Origine de la géométrie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. 2nd ed., 1974. ET: Edmund Husserl's Origin of Geometry: An Introduction. Tr. John P. Leavey. New York: Nicolas Hays, 1977. 1967: De la Grammatologie. Paris: Minuit. ET: Of Grammatology. Tr. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976. Ch. 2 of the ET, "Linguistics and Grammatology," was published in Sub-Stance, No. 10 (1974), 127-81. La Voix et le phénomène: Introduction au problème du signe dans la phénoménologie de Husserl. Paris: PressesUniversitaires de France. 2nd ed., 1972. ET: Speech and Phenomena: And Other Fssays on Husserl's Theory of Signs. Tr. David B. Allison. Evanston: Northwestern Univer- sity Press, 1973. L'Ecriture et la différence. Paris: Seuil. ET by Alan Bass is forthcoming. 1972: La Dissémination. Paris: Seuil. Marges de la philosophie. Paris: Minuit. Positions. Paris: Minuit. 1974: Glas. Paris: Editions Galilée. 1976: L'Archéologie du frivole: Lire Condillac. Paris: Denoel/Gonthier. Rpt. of 1973 Introduction to Condillac's Essai sur l'origine des connaissances humaines (Paris: Editions Galilee). 145 Eperons: Les Styles de Nietzsche. Venice: Corbo e Fiore. Rpt. and tr. in- to English, Italian, and German of the 1972 "La Question du style." II. Articles by Derrida " 1959 : 'GenZseet structure' et la phénoménologie."Entretiens sur les notions de genèse et de structure. Ed. Maurice de Gandillac et al. Paris: Mouton, 1965, pp. 243-60.
    [Show full text]
  • Derridean Deconstruction and Feminism
    DERRIDEAN DECONSTRUCTION AND FEMINISM: Exploring Aporias in Feminist Theory and Practice Pam Papadelos Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Discipline of Gender, Work and Social Inquiry Adelaide University December 2006 Contents ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................III DECLARATION .....................................................................................................IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................V INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 THESIS STRUCTURE AND OVERVIEW......................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 1: LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS – FEMINISM AND DECONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................... 8 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 8 FEMINIST CRITIQUES OF PHILOSOPHY..................................................................... 10 Is Philosophy Inherently Masculine? ................................................................ 11 The Discipline of Philosophy Does Not Acknowledge Feminist Theories......... 13 The Concept of a Feminist Philosopher is Contradictory Given the Basic Premises of Philosophy.....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Derrida and the Singularity of Literature
    DERRIDA AND THE SINGULARITY OF LITERATURE Jonathan Culler* In This Strange Institution Called Literature, an interview with Derek Attridge, Jacques Derrida offers an eloquent homage to literature: Experience of Being, nothing less, nothing more, on the edge of metaphysics, literature perhaps stands on the edge of everything, almost beyond everything, including itself. It’s the most interesting thing in the world, maybe more interesting than the world, and this is why, if it has no definition, what is heralded and refused under the name of literature cannot be identified with any other discourse. It will never be scientific, philosophical, conversational.1 This is a celebration of literature of a sort not much heard these days, when advanced critical approaches treat literature as one discourse among others, to privilege which would be an elitist mistake. In fact, this celebration of literature is not a privileging of some distinctiveness of literary language or of aesthetic achievement—literature, Derrida stresses, has no definition—but it nevertheless gives an importance to literary discourse, its engagement with the world, on the edge of the world, and the engagement that it calls forth in readers, which has the possibility to transform our literary culture. In a new book The Singularity of Literature, which is largely inspired by Derrida, Derek Attridge writes, “Derrida’s work over the past thirty-five years constitutes the most significant, far-reaching, and inventive exploration of literature for our time.”2 This is unmistakably true, though it is not widely recognized. One of the more grotesque aspects of the mediatic reception of Derrida in the United States is the idea that somehow Derrida’s work and deconstruction generally have constituted an attack on literature.
    [Show full text]
  • PHIL 463/563 Author: Jacques DERRIDA Fall 2016 Instructor
    PHIL 463/563 Author: Jacques DERRIDA Fall 2016 Instructor: Professor Beata Stawarska Noon - 1:50pm, T & TH, 250C SCH Office Hours: T 2-3:50pm & by appointment Office: SCH 247 E-mail: [email protected] Description This class surveys representative works by the contemporary Algerian-Jewish-French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930-2004). We will focus especially on the tasks and methods of deconstruction, which is first and foremost a style of reading texts attending to their logical and rhetorical dimensions. A related focus will be on Derrida’s critique of Western metaphysics of presence with its set of violent and vertical dichotomies such as interiority and exteriority, speech and writing, male and female, self and other, and on his attempt to thematize difference in a more complex, dynamic, and non-hierarchical manner – both at the level of theory and practice. These two main foci determine the design of this class, which examines Derrida’s deconstructive reading of Husserl’s phenomenology of consciousness with its commitment to the primacy of sound and/or voice (The Voice and Phenomena); Plato’s Phaedrus and the undecidable status of writing as a pharmakon (remedy and/or poison) (Dissemination); and J. L. Austin’s and John Searle’s speech acts theory and its conception of the performative (Limited Inc). We will then address Derrida’s more recent, socially and politically situated work, especially the question of sexual difference and feminism (select essays from Psyche), of an indeconstructible and other- oriented justice (‘Force of Law: the Mystical Foundation of Authority’), and of linguistic and cultural identity within a post-colonial context (Monolingualism of the Other).
    [Show full text]