Discover

Apories

Minsik readers
0.0
0 ratings
Other platforms
4.0
1 ratings
140
PAGES
~2h 20min
READING TIME
French
LANGUAGE
Published 1993 Galilée
ISBN
2718604611, 9782718604619
Editions
Unknown Binding
Minsik want to read: 0
Minsik reading: 0
Minsik read: 0
Open Library want to read: 0
Open Library reading: 0
Open Library read: 0

About Author

Jacques Derrida

The Searle–Derrida debate is a famous intellectual dispute opposing John Searle and Jacques Derrida, after Derrida responded to J. L. Austin's theory of the illocutionary act in his 1972 paper "Signature Event Context". In his 1977 essay Reiterating the Differences: A Reply to Derrida, Searle argued that Derrida's apparent rejection of Austin was unwarranted, but later refused to let this 1977 reply be printed along with Derrida's papers in the 1988 collection Limited Inc—in which a new text by Derrida responded to Searle's positions on the topic. In the 1990s, Searle clarified why he did not consider Derrida's approach to be legitimate philosophy. Commentators have sometimes interpreted the seemingly failed nature of the exchange between Searle and Derrida as a prominent example of a confrontation between analytical and continental philosophy, some having considered it a series of elaborate misunderstandings while others have seen either Searle or Derrida gaining the upper hand. While the fundamental opposition between the two philosophers lay in their different understanding of intentionality, the debate is famous for its degree of mutual hostility, which can be seen from Searle's statement that "It would be a mistake to regard Derrida's discussion of Austin as a confrontation between two prominent philosophical traditions", to which Derrida replied that that sentence was "the only sentence of the 'reply' to which I can subscribe".

Description

"My death - is it possible?". That is the question asked, explored, and analyzed in Jacques Derrida's new book. "Is my death possible?" How is this question to be understood? How and by whom can it be asked, can it be quoted, can it be an appropriate question, and can it be asked in the appropriate moment, the moment of "my death"? One of the aporetic experiences touched upon in this seminal essay is the impossible, yet unavoidable experience that "my death" can never be subject to an experience that would be properly mine, that I can have and account for, yet that there is, at the same time, nothing closer to me and more properly mine than "my death.". This book bears a special significance because in it Derrida focuses on an issue that has informed the whole of his work up to the present. For the last thirty years, Derrida has repeatedly, in various contexts and various ways, broached the question of aporia. Making it his central concern here Derrida stakes out a new frontier, at which the debate with his work must take place from now on: the debate about the aporia between singularity and generality, about the national, linguistic, and cultural specificity of experience and the trans-national, trans-cultural law that protects this specificity; the aporia of the necessity to continue working in the tradition of critique and of the idea of critique, yet the corresponding necessity to transcend it without compromising it; the apoetical obligation to host the foreigner and the alien and yet to respect him, her, or it as foreign.

Detailed Ratings

0.0Emotional Impact
No ratings yet
0.0Intellectual Depth
No ratings yet
0.0Writing Quality
No ratings yet
0.0Rereadability
No ratings yet
0.0Pacing
No ratings yet
0.0Readability
No ratings yet
0.0Plot Complexity
No ratings yet
0.0Humor
No ratings yet