--- Hello -- well I beg to differ with you on this matter. Last autumn
Mister Derrida signed a petition protesting the occupation of the
Palestinian territories and the repression in that country which wishes to
be. He also signed a petition to help Mr. Edward Said whose books had been
banned by M. Arafat. I think it a tad simple to try and explain the man
before he has spoken. I disagree completely with E.Mitchell's views.
Sincerely,
Charmaine
>
>I'd like to weigh in on this subject although perhaps it is neither wise
>nor
>necessary. I think M. Derrida has made it quite clear over the years what
>his interests are. Yes there is a political component to his work but only
>indirectly. "Positions" is probably the most concise and direct statement
>about the political dimensions of his work which in a nutshell (no pun
>intended) argues the untenability of any and all avowedly political
>philosophies. This of course does not mean that politiical texts and
>theory
>are absent from his work but the thrust of his work seems to advocate being
>non-positioned. Of course, this itself is a position but this
>non-positioning of oneself is meant as a discursive and philosophical
>practice or praxis which seeks the "chora" and attempts to stand in the gap
>created by the antinomies of reason and the contradictions and paradoxes of
>experience.
>
>See below references to Encyclopedia Brittanica re: chora
>
>
>Plato's central inspiration, which unifies his metaphysics, his
>cosmology, his theory of man, and his doctrine of the soul, was
>basically dualistic (in the sense of dialectical dualism) with two
>irreducible principles: the Idea and the chora (or material
>"receptacle") in which the Idea impresses itself. All of this world is
>conditioned by materiality and necessity; and because of this, the
>descent of souls into bodies is said to be rendered necessary as
>well.
>
>http://www.eb.com:180/bol/topic?eu=117389&sctn=3#s_top
>
>Among the important features of the dialogue are its introduction of
>God as the "demiurge"--the intelligent cause of all order and
>structure in the world of becoming--and the emphatic recognition of
>the essentially tentative character of natural science. It is also
>noteworthy that, though Plato presents a corpuscular physics, his
>metaphysical substrate is not matter but chora (space). The
>presence of space as a factor requires the recognition, over and
>above God or mind, of an element that he called ananke
>(necessity). The activity of the demiurge ensures that the universe is
>in general rational and well-ordered, but the brute force of material
>necessity sets limits to the scope and efficacy of reason. The details
>of Plato's cosmology, physiology, and psychophysics are of great
>importance for the history of science but metaphysically of
>secondary interest.
>
>http://www.eb.com:180/bol/topic?eu=115123&sctn=17#407357
>
>
>I hope this doesn't sound too pedantic but I believe it would be
>inconsistent with Derrida's work as it stands to be inserting himself into
>a
>political situation where he has really no authority. Perhaps even a bit
>arrogant for someone such as himself to think that he should say something.
>A thinker such as Derrida, I think, can only be expected to comment on
>topical or current historical events if he is pressed to or asked to either
>by some public body or by politicians themselves. It is of course not at
>all uncommon for news organizations and government to consult with members
>of the academy but is Derrida really the type of member of the academy that
>such groups might go to for any kind of practical advice or general
>overview. No doubt he abhors the loss of life and the escalation of
>tensions but these are sentiments and views of a private citizen. What
>more
>would he be in a position to say?
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>C. Daly
>
>
>>From: maureen ford <mford@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: Re: Derrida and Silence
>>Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:51:40 -0400
>>
>>I would like to speak in support of Stuart Elden's reference to the wisdom
>>of silence, and speak against the call for Derrida to fill a void somehow
>>left with Foucault's absence. In addition to the wisdom of taking time to
>>consider before speaking (not to mention waiting for a time when genuine
>>dialogue, including listening, might be possible... a time at which we
>>might
>>not yet have arrived), I recall Foucault's reluctance to speak as a
>>"public
>>intellectual" such that his speaking would be conferred with an
>>all-encompassing authority. The very call for Derrida to join Chomsky and
>>Fisk in making public declarations itself seems dangerous in just the way
>>Foucault resisted. I don't have the document here with me but I am
>>thinking
>>of the contrast between Foucault and Chomsky's comments in their join
>>interview...
>>
>>If Derrida may only speak because it is demanded by an audience that is
>>ready to give the weight of his seemingly singular "brilliance" then it
>>seems perhaps wise not to speak at all.
>>
>>maureen
>>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Mister Derrida signed a petition protesting the occupation of the
Palestinian territories and the repression in that country which wishes to
be. He also signed a petition to help Mr. Edward Said whose books had been
banned by M. Arafat. I think it a tad simple to try and explain the man
before he has spoken. I disagree completely with E.Mitchell's views.
Sincerely,
Charmaine
>
>I'd like to weigh in on this subject although perhaps it is neither wise
>nor
>necessary. I think M. Derrida has made it quite clear over the years what
>his interests are. Yes there is a political component to his work but only
>indirectly. "Positions" is probably the most concise and direct statement
>about the political dimensions of his work which in a nutshell (no pun
>intended) argues the untenability of any and all avowedly political
>philosophies. This of course does not mean that politiical texts and
>theory
>are absent from his work but the thrust of his work seems to advocate being
>non-positioned. Of course, this itself is a position but this
>non-positioning of oneself is meant as a discursive and philosophical
>practice or praxis which seeks the "chora" and attempts to stand in the gap
>created by the antinomies of reason and the contradictions and paradoxes of
>experience.
>
>See below references to Encyclopedia Brittanica re: chora
>
>
>Plato's central inspiration, which unifies his metaphysics, his
>cosmology, his theory of man, and his doctrine of the soul, was
>basically dualistic (in the sense of dialectical dualism) with two
>irreducible principles: the Idea and the chora (or material
>"receptacle") in which the Idea impresses itself. All of this world is
>conditioned by materiality and necessity; and because of this, the
>descent of souls into bodies is said to be rendered necessary as
>well.
>
>http://www.eb.com:180/bol/topic?eu=117389&sctn=3#s_top
>
>Among the important features of the dialogue are its introduction of
>God as the "demiurge"--the intelligent cause of all order and
>structure in the world of becoming--and the emphatic recognition of
>the essentially tentative character of natural science. It is also
>noteworthy that, though Plato presents a corpuscular physics, his
>metaphysical substrate is not matter but chora (space). The
>presence of space as a factor requires the recognition, over and
>above God or mind, of an element that he called ananke
>(necessity). The activity of the demiurge ensures that the universe is
>in general rational and well-ordered, but the brute force of material
>necessity sets limits to the scope and efficacy of reason. The details
>of Plato's cosmology, physiology, and psychophysics are of great
>importance for the history of science but metaphysically of
>secondary interest.
>
>http://www.eb.com:180/bol/topic?eu=115123&sctn=17#407357
>
>
>I hope this doesn't sound too pedantic but I believe it would be
>inconsistent with Derrida's work as it stands to be inserting himself into
>a
>political situation where he has really no authority. Perhaps even a bit
>arrogant for someone such as himself to think that he should say something.
>A thinker such as Derrida, I think, can only be expected to comment on
>topical or current historical events if he is pressed to or asked to either
>by some public body or by politicians themselves. It is of course not at
>all uncommon for news organizations and government to consult with members
>of the academy but is Derrida really the type of member of the academy that
>such groups might go to for any kind of practical advice or general
>overview. No doubt he abhors the loss of life and the escalation of
>tensions but these are sentiments and views of a private citizen. What
>more
>would he be in a position to say?
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>C. Daly
>
>
>>From: maureen ford <mford@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: Re: Derrida and Silence
>>Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:51:40 -0400
>>
>>I would like to speak in support of Stuart Elden's reference to the wisdom
>>of silence, and speak against the call for Derrida to fill a void somehow
>>left with Foucault's absence. In addition to the wisdom of taking time to
>>consider before speaking (not to mention waiting for a time when genuine
>>dialogue, including listening, might be possible... a time at which we
>>might
>>not yet have arrived), I recall Foucault's reluctance to speak as a
>>"public
>>intellectual" such that his speaking would be conferred with an
>>all-encompassing authority. The very call for Derrida to join Chomsky and
>>Fisk in making public declarations itself seems dangerous in just the way
>>Foucault resisted. I don't have the document here with me but I am
>>thinking
>>of the contrast between Foucault and Chomsky's comments in their join
>>interview...
>>
>>If Derrida may only speak because it is demanded by an audience that is
>>ready to give the weight of his seemingly singular "brilliance" then it
>>seems perhaps wise not to speak at all.
>>
>>maureen
>>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp