/lit/ - Literature

>>17647171
BASED AND REDPILLED

>>17645214
>>17645670
I JUST SHAT MYSELF MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmm......................................

tao thinks aliens are real and are visiting us. he thinks US government has alien technology.

Jacques 'Jackie' Derrida aka L'homme orange

Alright, Derrida thread, let's keep it civil.

I'm reading The Gift of Death and it's interesting how the "second" Derrida approaches the practical consequences of his radical theory, even going as far of retroactively defanging his thought. In fact while the book can be summarize as deconstructed history of responsibility, responsibility per-se remains a sort of quasi-transcendental. In fact it becomes the condition of possibilty of a "goodness". This more and more leads me to believe that the Derrida, at least during that period can be described as eccentric kantian, trying to juggle the perils of his thoughts and the challenges of politics and ethics (to which he was completely disinterested in his early work)

Also I'm interested in the opinion of Christians about his critic of the christian notion of responsibility, always undermined by the sacrificial mysterium and an "economy of promise" (ie Heaven) that undercats any responsibilty toowards the other in favor of the promise of gaining.

Of Grammatology

>mfw

>>3870360
¿por qué?, oye, háblame de ti, me parece curioso que postees para decir tan sólo eso, ¿tienes algún problema? cuéntame

>>3870320
No, it seems more italian than spanish.

Hello, I'm going to read full dictionaries, because i am so rigorous with meanings and i want to understand everything.
(I am also insensible and i don't have will so i use to don't understand words as 'happy' or 'angry',but, ignore this, i am so confused, maybe it is only psychosis or psychopathy). Spanish is my maternal language.
What do you think? How do i into semiotics?

>>3561243
> Language can be deconstructed because every word is a metaphor. got it. move on.

You're talking about differance, not deconstruction, and you've still got it wrong. Differance is essentially a critique of Saussure. There is not one line between a signifier and signified, but an INFINITE web of lines going from signifier to INFINITE signifieds.

I've explained deconstruction to you all in a thread here before, and yet none of you seem to have remembered it at all. Deconstruction is not meaningless babble; it is a tool to GET RID OF meaningless babble from the field of philosophy.

Did Derrida support Freud? Did he support Nietzsche?

NO HE DID NOT. You were supposed to deconstruct his "positive presentations" of their philosophies. Derrida is anti-Freud, anti-Nietzsche; he has spoke with sincere hatred for just a bout every philosopher, except for perhaps Heidegger and Kierkegaard, since their philosophies are "from the ground up."

Derrida is a force DESTROYING bullshit; not prolonging it.

You got something you want to say to me? Please explain what problem you have with Mr. Derrida.

Logic is a social construct.

>>3475198
>the objective events they described

Objective events will never, ever be able to be described. We only have maps, we are maps, and we cannot live without maps. When you see with your eyes, that is a map that your brain is creating. You do not see ANYTHING at all in the sense and meaning of the word "see". We are all liars when we say "the sunset looks beautiful". The simulation of the sun that we are capable of creating is what is beautiful. The grass you "see" is a creation as are the words you "write". You have "written" that I am biased due to social conditioning, but the term social conditioning itself is just another set of words, another sunset.

>>3475198
How am I biased? I realize that I am biased in reading Derrida, and that you have not read him if that's what you mean.

>>3475190
Deconstruction is something that all of us are doing constantly. You have done it before, but never given a word to it, never had knowledge that term could describe your action as "deconstruction". You will deconstruct this post whether you want to or not.

>>3475180

Finally,

>there can be no deconstructed 'identity', only structural similarity, between the language and the empirical fact.

But wait...I thought you said something about confusing the map for territory....???? A contradiction is here. You accuse me of confusing maps for territory, and then you profess maps to BE the "truth".

>>3475175
Well, this is no deconstruction but you seem to be familiar with Différance.

>We haven't read Derrida; Derrida has read us:

This is true. Derrida loved the notion of a ghost, in fact, and that is what he has become. Not a philosopher, but a specter that haunts us just like Marx does.

>>3475180
>confusing the map for the territory

You see, maps are creations just like texts. But does that mean that they have no meaning? Not at all. They are here for us to play with. You seemed to have misinterpreted some of my playfulness as me attempting to say some kind of transcendental signified, which is something a Derridian absolutely never does.

>I am able to view your actions outside the linguistic musings you are stuck in to gain a far more accurate, unbiased, and ultimately superior deconstruction of your actions.

That sounds great! I'm very happy for you.

>>3475161
Well, if you are the same guy I was replying to, you certainly are a hypocrite.

>the ability to have an impartial view of collective standards and morality.

You certainly don't have that, immediately making a judgment on my name!

>>3475156
You desire to be deconstructed. This is the central text. The subtext is the fact that you don't want to be deconstructed at all. It is a mere game to you, you simply wish to stick your hand out into the rain and feel drip off of you. When both of these texts are diffused, what is left? Curiosity. Curiosity kills the cat.

>>3475152
>There is no projection of self. There is the analysis of behaviour patterns and how it relates to the collective.

You couldn't have made an easier statement to deconstruct. Consider the "no projection of self" vs "analysis of behavior" deconstruction in the very words you posted. I hope you will gain some self-awareness from this exercise. You do know how to deconstruct, right? I'll do it for you if you can't deconstruct your own words due to some notion of "loving yourself" or something like that, feeling that you cannot dissect your own words.

>>3475147
Overtly, you have said that "nobody cares" and yet you made it quite clear that you do care by responding to my post. I am always ready to accept all forms of affection.

>>3475135
Also, take a chance to deconstruct my name: Am I really the only guy to have read Derrida on /lit/? Overtly my name suggests that I am the only person who has read it, in the duality there is the more obvious "truth": Of course other people have read Derrida.

But neither one of these are true. I am not trying to mark myself as someone who is literally "the only guy on /lit/ who has read Derrida" because at the time I made the name, I was of course aware that other people have read it. What am I doing? Free play.