[D66] De bedorven boterberg

[A.O.]

"One must refer to language’s peculiar inability to emerge from itself
in order to articulate its origin, and not to the thought of force.
Force is the other of language without which language would not be what
it is.
In order to respect this strange movement within language, in order
not to reduce it in turn, we would have to attempt a return to the
metaphor of darkness and light (of self-revelation and self-
concealment), the founding metaphor of Western philosophy as meta-
physics. The founding metaphor not only because it is a photological
one—and in this respect the entire history of our philosophy is a pho-
tology, the name given to a history of, or treatise on, light—but
because it is a metaphor."
--p. 31 Writing and Difference

On 09-11-18 16:13, A.O. wrote:
> To say that force is the origin of the phenomenon is to say nothing.
> By its very articulation force becomes a phenomenon. Hegel demon-
> strated convincingly that the explication of a phenomenon by a force is
> a tautology. 58
> --p. 31 Writing and Difference
> 
> On 08-11-18 08:49, A.O. wrote:
>> "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
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>