fa.analytic-philosophy | Группы Google

There is nothing inside the text

1. Michael_Dorfman

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 1 сен 2003, 15:37

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: "Michael_Dorfman" <michael_dorf...@yahoo.com>

Дата: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 12:35:28 GMT

Местное время: Пн. 1 сен 2003 15:35

Тема: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

--- In analytic-bord...@yahoogroups.com, ggoss123@a... wrote:

> What Derrida does in practice is focus exclusively on a text.
> For example, he might begin a talk with a sentence or two
> and then spend the rest of the talk deconstructing those
> sentences, which become his text. He considers the text
> apart from any context (nothing outside the text).

This is patently untrue, and forms a misreading of Derrida so
egregious as to border on slander.

I'm going to assume good faith here, and suppose that you are
confused (and not lying) and refer you to "Signature Event Context"
(note the latter term) where Derrida addresses the notion of context
(and, in fact, turns it into a key philosopheme.)

Derrida does *not* encourage "considering the text apart from
context"-- in fact, he would argue that such a thing is
meaningless. In fact, there is nothing *but* context. That is one
(preferred) translation of "There is nothing outside the text."

The fact that the context of production and the context of reception
are irreducible to each other does *not* authorize the reader to
read wildly or capriciously. Derrida insists upon this point,
repeatedly.

> Wittgenstein pointed out 60 years ago that words have
> meaning only in the stream of life. A text isolated from
> the stream of life is meaningless (LAST WRITINGS ON
> THE PHILOSOPHY OF PSYCHOLOGY).

Derrida would agree. And has, at least 30 years ago. cf "SEC".

> For example, the text "Mary had a little lamb" has
> no meaning unless you know whether she is walking to school
> or eating lunch, matters that lie outside the text.

Wrong! Those matters, for Derrida, do *not* lie outside "the
text". Those form an important part of the context. *Nothing* is
outside of the text. There is absolutely no thing, no fact that you
can rigorously identify as completely irrelevant to "Mary had a
little lamb." Context is infinite; "Mary had a little lamb" can be
read in a potentially infinite number of contexts. Anything--
*anything*-- could potentially be relevant. It's *all* part of the
text.

> If you sidled up to a stranger in the street and said,
> "Horse" or "Mary had a little lamb" the stranger would
> find these texts meaningless because she would have
> no way to place them in a meaningful context.

Odd that you think so. Maybe you and I know a different class of
strangers, or hang out on different streets. Where I come from,
people are easily able to parse and understand phrases like "horse"
or "Mary had a little lamb."

> The isolation of a text from its context and its use
> can lead to unwarranted skepticism.

> In other words, if you bar the placing of a text in the stream
> of life, then there is nothing meaningful inside the text. If
> Wittgenstein is right, there is no meaning possible at all.
> If we look at a text as if there was nothing beyond it, then
> there is nothing meaningful inside the text.

All of this is true. And, in fact, forms Derrida's point.

> Derrida, then, is deconstructing something without
> meaning. The text (if looked at outside the
> stream of life) has no presuppositions to examine and
> comment on. There are no hidden motives to expose
> in a meaningless document.

That's one mighty big "if" you're wielding there, partner. What you
say would be true *if* Derrida held the positions you impute to him.

Have you read any Derrida? Would you care to read a short text
together?

Michael Dorfman

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/9rHolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

2. ggoss123

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 2 сен 2003, 06:09

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: ggoss...@aol.com

Дата: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 03:09:01 GMT

Местное время: Вт. 2 сен 2003 06:09

Тема: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

In a message dated 8/31/03 3:57:30 AM, scepticalwhi...@yahoo.com writes:

>I am definitely not the best person to defend Derrida, but I will say
>this much. I do not believe that all of his insights are mundane, but
>unfortunately I have often only been able to squeeze them out by
>connecting them with similar insights expressed more perspicuously by
>others (which is not at all to suggest that he lifted them).

I don't believe that all of Derrida's insights are mundane
either. For example, I am in general agreement with a
rhetorical approach to philosophy. According to Garver,
Derrida borrowed many key ideas, but I see nothing wrong
with that. The goal is to reach some sort of understanding. . . .

>I also
>believe that part of your point concerning the importance of context
>turns on a misunderstand of Derrida's use of "text", which as I said
>is misleading and perhaps calculatingly so. I believe Michael
>presented a good explanation of the distinction awhile back, but I'll
>point you to another source.

>"Afterwords"(sic) in Limited Inc contains some responses by Derrida
>which deny unambiguously being a "skeptic-relativist-nihilist". He
>also says, "The phrase which for some has become a sort of slogan, in
>general so badly understood, of deconstruction ('there is nothing
>outside the text') means nothing else: there is nothing outside
>context."

For Garver the key was looking at how Derrida actually applied
the idea of there being nothing outside the text: that is, how did
Derrida approach a text? Did he approach it as if there were
nothing outside it? Garver thought he did and gave examples.

But now it sounds as if Derrida eventually came to agree with
Garver, whom I crudely summarized with "there is nothing
inside the text."

I am among those who, like Merleau-Ponty and Wittgenstein, hold that
words have meaning, but I suppose that its possible that "texte" is
French for "context" ("Il n'y a pas d'hors texte"). Pardon my French.

Now I have to figure out what "there is nothing outside context"
means. It sounds like "there is nothing outside everything,"
which is hard to dispute. I must be wrong.

Best,

Gary

What a beautiful thought I am thinking
concerning a great speckled bird. . . .
-- from "The Great Speckled Bird"

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

3. ggoss123

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 2 сен 2003, 07:11

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: ggoss...@aol.com

Дата: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 04:10:52 GMT

Местное время: Вт. 2 сен 2003 07:10

Тема: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

In a message dated 9/1/03 5:36:15 AM, michael_dorf...@yahoo.com writes:

>--- In analytic-bord...@yahoogroups.com, ggoss123@a... wrote:
>> What Derrida does in practice is focus exclusively on a text.
>> For example, he might begin a talk with a sentence or two
>> and then spend the rest of the talk deconstructing those
>> sentences, which become his text. He considers the text
>> apart from any context (nothing outside the text).
Michael wrote:
>This is patently untrue, and forms a misreading of Derrida so
>egregious as to border on slander.

LOL

Look at the essay "La loi des genres" in Parages. Derrida starts out
with two sentences that seem to say something clearly, but
he then veers off. He doesn't refute or develop what he's said.
He takes the opening remarks as a text and then casts
doubt on their semantics. The sentences are ambiguous but
giving them a context would clear that right up. Instead,
Derrida ponders many meanings, turning the two sentences
into a text.

>I'm going to assume good faith here, and suppose that you are
>confused (and not lying)

I didn't intend to upset you, and, to be honest, I don't have
time for quarrels, so I'm ending this correspondence
here. I guard my time closely.

My loss, of course. Good luck to you.

Best,

Gary

What a beautiful thought I am thinking
concerning a great speckled bird. . . .
-- from "The Great Speckled Bird"

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

4. Michael_Dorfman

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 2 сен 2003, 20:11

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: "Michael_Dorfman" <michael_dorf...@yahoo.com>

Дата: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 17:11:09 GMT

Местное время: Вт. 2 сен 2003 20:11

Тема: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

--- In analytic-bord...@yahoogroups.com, ggoss123@a... wrote:

- Показать цитируемый текст -

Derrida indeed begins "The Law of Genres" with two sentences that
*seem* to say something clearly: "Genres are not to be mixed. I
will not mix genres." He then spends much of the rest of the essay
interrogating the implication of these sentences, which are not
nearly as clear as they seem, and hold a variety of presuppositions
that need to be examined (not refuted or developed.)

> He takes the opening remarks as a text and then casts
> doubt on their semantics. The sentences are ambiguous but
> giving them a context would clear that right up. Instead,
> Derrida ponders many meanings, turning the two sentences
> into a text.

He provides a context, and then proceeds to find examples from
Blanchot, each of which is treated in context. If the sentences
could be "cleared right up", they'd hardly be worth writing a
philosophical essay about, right?

> >I'm going to assume good faith here, and suppose that you are
> >confused (and not lying)

> I didn't intend to upset you, and, to be honest, I don't have
> time for quarrels, so I'm ending this correspondence
> here. I guard my time closely.

Apparently more closely than you care to read. A pity, that.

> My loss, of course. Good luck to you.

Indeed. I wasn't looking for a quarrel-- rather a discussion. As
Derrida says elsewhere, the sine qua non of an "ethics of
discussion" is that each party has actually read the text they are
trying to discuss. I offered to read a Derrida text alongside you,
to see if you found there what you seem to expect to find.

The irony, of course, is that I agree with almost everything you are
saying. If you hadn't given your straw man the name of an actual
philosopher holding postions quite different than the ones you are
attacking, we'd have no problem at all.

Michael Dorfman

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

5. bruce denner

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 5 сен 2003, 22:34

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: bruce denner <blroad...@yahoo.com>

Дата: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 19:34:08 GMT

Местное время: Пт. 5 сен 2003 22:34

Тема: Re: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

--- Michael_Dorfman <michael_dorf...@yahoo.com> wrote:

to Gary

> The irony, of course, is that I agree with almost
> everything you are saying. ...
>If you hadn't given your straw man the name
> of an actual philosopher holding positions quite
>different than the ones you are attacking, we'd have
>no problem at all.

Let's see if I have this right. You agree with the
substance of Gary's remarks, his criticisms of a
certain philosophical position, but, in your
estimation, Derrida doesn't hold those positions.

But, when you write "...your straw man the name of an
actual philosopher", you prompt me to ask:

If who I attack is made of straw (a pointless fiction
of my imagination), then can my words of attack be any
less pointless?

bruce

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

6. John

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 6 сен 2003, 04:24

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: "John" <scepticalwhi...@yahoo.com>

Дата: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 01:24:01 GMT

Местное время: Сб. 6 сен 2003 04:24

Тема: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

One may offer valid criticisms of a view while simultaneously being
mistaken in one's attribution. In this case, Gary may be criticizing
the followers of Derrida who Derrida himself maintains have
misunderstood him, but misattributing those views to Derrida himself.
This would miss the target, but not be pointless.

I agree with Michael that Derrida explicitly disavows some of the
views ascribed to him, but I also believe that Derrida has said
ambiguous things that prompt such misunderstandings and his practice,
as Gary has pointed out, can sometimes be interpreted as evidence for
the views he disavows, so it's a tricky question, one I don't feel
qualified to answer.

--- In analytic-bord...@yahoogroups.com, bruce denner

- Показать цитируемый текст -

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

7. Michael_Dorfman

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 6 сен 2003, 14:17

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: "Michael_Dorfman" <michael_dorf...@yahoo.com>

Дата: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 11:17:48 GMT

Местное время: Сб. 6 сен 2003 14:17

Тема: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

--- In analytic-bord...@yahoogroups.com, "John"

<scepticalwhimsy@y...> wrote:
> I agree with Michael that Derrida explicitly disavows some of the
> views ascribed to him, but I also believe that Derrida has said
> ambiguous things that prompt such misunderstandings and his
practice,
> as Gary has pointed out, can sometimes be interpreted as evidence
for
> the views he disavows, so it's a tricky question, one I don't feel
> qualified to answer.

It is, indeed, a tricky question. And, perhaps not surprisingly, a
question that Derrida himself interrogates at some length in an
essay entitled "The Ear of the Other" where he examines to what
degree Nietzsche can be held responsible for the Nazi misreadings of
his works. That these are misreadings would seem to absolve
Nietzsche, one could argue, but Derrida won't let Nietzsche (or
himself) off the hook that easily-- the fact is that all writing is
understood only in context, and the context of reception is
potentially infinite. There is no way the author can (definitively)
control the way in which his text is understood, but he can still be
held responsible for (and asked to respond to) these later
interpretations.

In Nietzsche's case, this means using other strands within
Nietzsche's texts to counter the misreadings. In Derrida's case,
(having the benefit of being alive at the time of the misreadings)
it means trying to explain differently, to attempt to clear up any
misunderstandings.

That Derrida has been doing this for more than 30 years now without
apparent success is evidence of something--but of what, I cannot be
sure.

Michael Dorfman

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

8. John

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 6 сен 2003, 23:14

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: "John" <scepticalwhi...@yahoo.com>

Дата: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 20:14:58 GMT

Местное время: Сб. 6 сен 2003 23:14

Тема: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

Extremely interesting and something I must get around to reading. I
don't have any comments at the moment, but I thank you.

--- In analytic-bord...@yahoogroups.com, "Michael_Dorfman"

- Показать цитируемый текст -

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

9. Michael_Dorfman

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 6 сен 2003, 14:12

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: "Michael_Dorfman" <michael_dorf...@yahoo.com>

Дата: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 11:12:20 GMT

Местное время: Сб. 6 сен 2003 14:12

Тема: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside the text

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

--- In analytic-bord...@yahoogroups.com, bruce denner

<blroadies@y...> wrote:
> --- Michael_Dorfman <michael_dorfman@y...> wrote:
> Let's see if I have this right. You agree with the
> substance of Gary's remarks, his criticisms of a
> certain philosophical position, but, in your
> estimation, Derrida doesn't hold those positions.

Correct.

> But, when you write "...your straw man the name of an
> actual philosopher", you prompt me to ask:

> If who I attack is made of straw (a pointless fiction
> of my imagination), then can my words of attack be any
> less pointless?

Any less pointless? That's hard to say. But on the scale of
pointlessness, attacking positions not actually held by anyone ranks
right up there.

If there were actually a philosopher who holds the positions that
Gary attributes to Derrida, I would join Gary in deriding that
philosopher. However, as far as I know, the creature does not exist.
Which makes it difficult for me to get too wound up about it,
personally speaking.

Michael

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать

There is nothing inside Derrida's critics

10. bruce denner

Просмотреть профиль

Дополнительные параметры 6 сен 2003, 18:52

Группы новостей: fa.analytic-philosophy

Автор: bruce denner <blroad...@yahoo.com>

Дата: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 15:51:51 GMT

Местное время: Сб. 6 сен 2003 18:51

Тема: Re: [analytic-borders] Re: There is nothing inside Derrida's critics

  Переслать | Печать | Отдельное сообщение
  | Показать исходное
  | Сообщить об этом сообщении | Поиск сообщений от этого автора
  

--- Michael_Dorfman <michael_dorf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> If there were actually a philosopher who holds the
> positions that Gary attributes to Derrida, I would
>join Gary in deriding that philosopher. However, as
>far as I know, the creature does not exist.

Yet Gary exists, and I would get caught claiming he
isn't, but we are, philosophers. Nor am I content with
accusation "incoherence", most often used here as a
way of dismissal.

Over the years I've been trying to say positively what
Gary, and most others here, take to be the work of
philosophy. Currently, I'm of the persuasion that it
is a form of pop-psychology.

I'd been interested in your take.

bruce

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Переслать