TRANSCENDENCE IN IMMANENCE – A CONVERSATION WITH JACQUES DERRIDA ON SPACE, TIME AND MEANING by JACOB PETRUS KRUGER submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF LITERATURE AND PHILOSOPHY in the subject RELIGIOUS STUDIES at the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA SUPERVISOR: PROF. D.P. GOOSEN September 2011 SUMMARY This study postulates the existence of a notion of transcendence in immanence in the thought of Jacques Derrida. The deconstruction of, amongst others, Husserlian phenomenology and Saussurean structuralism, affords Derrida the opportunity of presenting a thought of contamination, haunting and impurity, which is a thought of transcendence in immanence. The hypothesis of a notion of transcendence in immanence in Derrida’s thought is refined by specifying it as temporal transcendence in immanence. Accordingly, the intimation of transcendence in immanence does not amount to the ontological acceptance of a separate transcendent realm. On the contrary, what appears is a monism: the infinite finitude of temporality. In conversation with the notion of temporal transcendence in immanence intimated in Derrida’s thought, this study proposes a notion of theological transcendence in immanence. Theological transcendence in immanence is presented as an inflected interpretive performance of salient themes from the tradition of Christian theology prior to the advent of modernity. From this perspective, all being is referred to God and finite creation is deemed to be a contingent, non-necessary participation, at an unquantifiable analogical remove, in the life and being of God. The notions of space, time and meaning that emerge from such a premise are subsequently explored, and brought into conversation with the corresponding notions in Derrida’s work. The study concludes by asking whether the conversation between the notions of temporal and theological transcendence in immanence can in any way be furthered, or whether the two positions should rather be regarded as irreconcilable, that is, as lying separatively transcendent to each other. In response, it is suggested that the notion of transcendence in immanence implies the attempt to relate juxtaposed positions after the fashion of transcendence in immanence. The possibility of temporal transcendence in immanence inhabiting theological transcendence in immanence after the fashion of transcendence in immanence is firstly considered and rejected. Thereupon, the reverse option, namely that of theological transcendence in immanence making use of temporal transcendence in immanence, ii while at the same time transcending it, is considered and judged to be a suitable provisional outcome of the conversation with Derrida. KEY TERMS Jacques Derrida, phenomenology, structuralism, theology, analogy, transcendence, immanence, space, time, meaning, difference, change, metaphysics iii For my wife, Donette, and our daughters, Madeleine and Marianné iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ................................................................................. vii 1. Transcendence in immanence 1.1 The meaning of space and time …………………………………………… 1 1.2 A hypothesis: different interpretations of transcendence in immanence .. 3 1.3 The conversation with Derrida ……………………………………………… 10 1.4 The hypothesis refined: temporal and theological transcendence in immanence …………………………………………………………………… 19 1.5 Whereto the conversation? …………………………………………………. 21 2. Speaking of spatialisation: modernity and its discontents 2.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………… 26 2.2 Spatialisation: structuralism ………………………………………………… 27 2.3 Spatialisation: phenomenology …………………………………………….. 31 2.4 Presence ……………………………………………………………………… 38 2.5 On the contrary: an ecstatic Platonism and a high scholastic theology of participation in the infinite …………………………………………………… 50 2.6 The epistemological turn ……………………………………………………. 68 3. Derrida: spacing and the infinite finitude of temporality 3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………… 87 3.2 Deconstructing structuralism ……………………………………………….. 89 3.3 Deconstructing phenomenology ……………………………………………. 101 3.4 Différance: the becoming space of time and the becoming time of space 113 3.5 The conversation with Heidegger ………………………………………….. 119 3.6 Temporal transcendence in immanence ………………………………….. 126 4. Theological transcendence in immanence: proportion and progression 4.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………… 130 4.2 Theological transcendence in immanence ………………………………... 133 4.3 A semiology deriving from theological transcendence in immanence …. 147 4.4 Space, time and change …………………………………………………….. 156 v 4.5 The practice of progression and proportion ……………………………….. 169 5. Whereto the conversation? Once more: transcendence in immanence 5.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………184 5.2 Theologies of temporal transcendence in immanence ........................... 191 5.3 Theological transcendence in immanence .............................................. 209 5.4 Derrida’s impossible God ........................................................................ 222 6. Conclusion ................................................................................................ 234 7. Bibliography ............................................................................................. 236 vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe a huge debt of gratitude to my parents for awakening in me a love of learning and for encouraging my studies all these years. I can only hope to emulate the wonderful discussions with my father and the loving support from my mother in my relation with my own children. Speaking of encouragement, the affectionate interest shown by my parents-in-law deserves an equally affectionate word of thanks. I want to extend a word of enormous gratitude to my promotor, professor Danie Goosen. He opened up vast new vistas in my theological and philosophical imagination, and guided me on a new intellectual path while at the same time extending a hand of warmth and friendship as a fellow traveller. A final word of loving gratitude must go to my wife, Donette. Your encouragement to persevere and to get up early in the mornings to work carried me through on countless occasions. Both our children were born in the years that this study was undertaken. For putting up with and absent husband and father at those times that I played truant in the company of theologians and philosophers I cannot thank you enough. Ad maiorem Dei gloriam vii Chapter 1 Transcendence in immanence 1.1 The meaning of space and time What is the meaning of space and time? The mind reels and slips when faced with such a question. Where is one to start in preparing some kind of responsible answer? To start answering will always be to have started already. A vast amount of assumptions will underlie any attempt to answer this simple question, and as many of them as possible will have to be addressed in as rigorous a fashion as possible. However, one has to start somewhere. It should be noted, in terms of starting somewhere, that the genitive construction in the question regarding the meaning of space and time may be understood subjectively, as well as objectively. On the one hand, how do the notions of space and time facilitate or contribute to the emergence of meaning? In other words, what is the space of meaning, what is the time of meaning? On the other hand, simply put, what does “space” mean and what does “time” mean? Subsequently, are the subjective and objective interpretations of the question mutually exclusive or do they rather contribute towards the interpretation of each other? Closely related and perhaps influencing the different ways of interpreting the question regarding the meaning of space and time is the issue of situating the question somewhere within the vast spectrum of intellectual discourse. From the perspective of a modern, natural scientific orientation, it may, for instance, be more - well, natural - to assume that by “space”, one is indicating extension - length, breadth and height - and by “time”, duration.1 Such a discourse may furthermore typically consider measurability to be an important epistemic value. Alternatively, situating the question regarding the meaning of space and time in the field of linguistics and semiology brings a different range of issues to the fore. Are spatial and chronological references, for instance, to be viewed as metaphorical in one way or another? This, of course, immediately raises the question of metaphor and the relationship of metaphor to meaning. A moment’s reflection makes it clear 1 Contemporary theoretical physics acknowledges that a rigid attachment to a naïve realist conception of space and time on the one hand, and a notion of meaning as the subjective addition of human consciousness, may not be very fruitful. Cf. eg. David Deutsch, The Fabric of Reality (London: Penguin, 1997), esp. ch. 5. Roger Penrose, The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe (London: Vintage, 2007). 1 that to ask whether space and time are (mere) metaphors may be too facile a formulation. Which would, after all, be the more basic category? The etymology of the word “metaphor” seemingly already assumes the notions of space and time. This consideration may be radicalised when it is realized that the intimation of meaning in itself assumes some kind of notion of space and time. Meaning, after all, emerges where something is brought into - or understood to be in - a relation to something else, and this probably necessarily involves spatial and chronological