Re-thinking What We Think About Derrida

Although many still see Derrida as a thinker opposed to a unified systematic meaning, there has recently been growing recognition that Derrida, in his later years, suggested that his work is not averse to formalisation. In support of this view, this paper points out that, in 1990, Derrida himself to...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Galetti, Dino (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Rhodes University 2010
In: The Indo-Pacific journal of phenomenology
Year: 2010, Volume: 10, Issue: 2, Pages: 1-18
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Description
Summary:Although many still see Derrida as a thinker opposed to a unified systematic meaning, there has recently been growing recognition that Derrida, in his later years, suggested that his work is not averse to formalisation. In support of this view, this paper points out that, in 1990, Derrida himself told us that his first work of 1954 reveals a "law" which impels his career, and that some responses had arisen even there. Some benefits of adopting such a common pole are set out, and an interrelated "system" developed to relate the law of 1954 to the later responses, in order to help find a common, systematic base for Derrida’s oeuvre. The need to accommodate approaches which are wary of a systematic approach is nevertheless acknowledged, and possible ways of reconciling the diverse readings of Derrida’s intent and collaboratively furthering the formalisation of Derrida’s oeuvre for posterity are outlined in closing.
ISSN:1445-7377
Contains:Enthalten in: The Indo-Pacific journal of phenomenology
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.2989/IPJP.2010.10.2.6.1087