[D66] Het gebakken boerenbedrog

[A.O.]

"Allan Megill believes Derrida is right in thinking that Foucault
remains bound up in a "spatial metaphoric that is force-excluding"
(232). "In his critique of History of Madness, Derrida points out that
Foucault is, by his own argument, trapped within 'logocentrism,' within
the general historical guilt borne by Western language. For whatever his
claims to be resurrecting the silent language of an oppressed madness,
Foucault continues to speak the language of the very reason that carried
out the oppression in the first place. In short, he is still caught
within [and strengthening] the all-powerful order that he is seeking to
evade.... Derrida's characteristic response to the historical guilt that
in his view inevitably accompanies Western reason is to engage in a play
with the text" (233).

On 08-11-18 08:30, A.O. wrote:
> "Foucault understands Descartes as having been the first to expel
> madness in an "act of force," for he considered it simply an
> impossibility. Derrida disagrees, saying that Descartes doesn't exclude
> madness but rather brings it to a hyperbolical exasperation. While
> Foucault thinks Descartes wanted to neutralize the originality of
> madness in order to make it the Cogito's other, Derrida thinks that one
> only gets to the Cogito through the total madness embodied in the malin
> genie. If Derrida is right, Foucault's whole project is trouble, for if
> the Cogito only emerges through total madness, the desire to let madness
> speak for itself is a gesture of strengthening the Cogito. Not only
> that, but Foucault would have done an extreme disservice to the
> radicality of the Cartesian project (by nevertheless participating in it)."
> 
> On 07-11-18 15:16, A.O. wrote:
>> "Derrida believes force is a by product of language's power of
>> signification. Because the signifier is always in excess, meaning more
>> than it is supposed to, the writer's intended meaning cannot contain it;
>> this is the force of language. "Force is not darkness, and it is not
>> hidden under a form for which it would serve as substance, matter, or
>> crypt. Force cannot be conceived on the basis of an oppositional couple,
>> that is, on the basis of the complicity between phenomenology and
>> occultism. Nor can it be conceived, from within phenomenology, as the
>> fact opposed to meaning."
>>
>>
>>
>> http://strongreading.blogspot.com/2010/08/derrida-writing-and-difference-chapters.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> D66 mailing list
>> D66 at tuxtown.net
>> http://www.tuxtown.net/mailman/listinfo/d66
>>
> _______________________________________________
> D66 mailing list
> D66 at tuxtown.net
> http://www.tuxtown.net/mailman/listinfo/d66
>