This paper focuses on the intersections between Jacques Derrida’s thinking of teletechnology, virtualisation, mondialisation and the role that education and the ‘university to come’ can play in coping with the changing landscapes of our increasingly digitised world. This analysis also addresses what I call the pragmatist critique of Derrida, which accuses deconstruction of being incapable of offering any prescriptive norms for how we can actually achieve systemic political change and what those changes should look like beyond a vague or unrealistic utopian hope for an undefinable, unanticipatable ‘event’ to come. I argue, in contrast, that Derrida’s thinking on teletechnology provides one of many examples of the practical implications of deconstruction and can help explain Derrida’s account of how the politico-economic outside functions and conditions the university. Moreover, I explain Derrida’s argument that the ‘how’ of interrupting or breaking the vicious cycle of technoeconomic power structures cannot be solved by a mere list of preprogramed objectives and thus must necessarily be left open to uncertainty, further determination and the possibility of the unknown. At the same time, however, this resistance to preprogramed objectives does not entail an outright rejection of political resistance or education about the power structures at work within various domains of life.
{"title":"Derrida’s Pragmatism: The Political and Pedagogical Implications of Derrida’s ‘University to Come’ in a Teletechnological World","authors":"Joel Bock","doi":"10.3366/drt.2022.0288","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2022.0288","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on the intersections between Jacques Derrida’s thinking of teletechnology, virtualisation, mondialisation and the role that education and the ‘university to come’ can play in coping with the changing landscapes of our increasingly digitised world. This analysis also addresses what I call the pragmatist critique of Derrida, which accuses deconstruction of being incapable of offering any prescriptive norms for how we can actually achieve systemic political change and what those changes should look like beyond a vague or unrealistic utopian hope for an undefinable, unanticipatable ‘event’ to come. I argue, in contrast, that Derrida’s thinking on teletechnology provides one of many examples of the practical implications of deconstruction and can help explain Derrida’s account of how the politico-economic outside functions and conditions the university. Moreover, I explain Derrida’s argument that the ‘how’ of interrupting or breaking the vicious cycle of technoeconomic power structures cannot be solved by a mere list of preprogramed objectives and thus must necessarily be left open to uncertainty, further determination and the possibility of the unknown. At the same time, however, this resistance to preprogramed objectives does not entail an outright rejection of political resistance or education about the power structures at work within various domains of life.","PeriodicalId":42836,"journal":{"name":"Derrida Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44222382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Speculativism","authors":"C. Fleming","doi":"10.3366/drt.2022.0283","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2022.0283","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42836,"journal":{"name":"Derrida Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47188714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this paper I address Jacques Derrida's consistent phenomenological critique of his colleague Louis Althusser. Over the course of many decades, Derrida explicitly draws attention to what he takes to be Althusser's problematic pre-critical scientism, which is the direct result of the latter's failure to engage with Husserl and Heidegger. However, as I attempt to show, Althusser sought to reveal deeper problems associated with transcendental-critical questions in post-Kantian philosophy. For Althusser, questions concerning the ‘conditions of possibility’ of knowledge and experience reproduce the idealist problematic that he calls ‘empiricism’. Charting a different trajectory within contemporary French philosophy, Althusser combines insights from Spinoza, Marx, and other figures often unmentioned by Derrida to produce a novel, non-transcendental philosophical approach to key problems that arise in epistemology and the philosophy of science.
{"title":"Althusser and Derrida at the Limits of Transcendental Philosophy","authors":"David Maruzzella","doi":"10.3366/drt.2022.0274","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2022.0274","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I address Jacques Derrida's consistent phenomenological critique of his colleague Louis Althusser. Over the course of many decades, Derrida explicitly draws attention to what he takes to be Althusser's problematic pre-critical scientism, which is the direct result of the latter's failure to engage with Husserl and Heidegger. However, as I attempt to show, Althusser sought to reveal deeper problems associated with transcendental-critical questions in post-Kantian philosophy. For Althusser, questions concerning the ‘conditions of possibility’ of knowledge and experience reproduce the idealist problematic that he calls ‘empiricism’. Charting a different trajectory within contemporary French philosophy, Althusser combines insights from Spinoza, Marx, and other figures often unmentioned by Derrida to produce a novel, non-transcendental philosophical approach to key problems that arise in epistemology and the philosophy of science.","PeriodicalId":42836,"journal":{"name":"Derrida Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43307284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Following some of the main arguments Derrida develops in ‘White Mythology’, in this article I propose an unexplored dialogue between Derrida and Althusser considering the use and the place that each of them gives to metaphor in their philosophical strategies. I give special attention to some rather isolated passages of ‘Elements of Self-Criticism’ and ‘Lenin and Philosophy’, where Althusser, against all evidence, seems to be quite aware of the importance of metaphor and mataphorization in every philosophical practice. As Balibar has argued, contrary to the metaphysical tradition, metaphor would not be the opposite but what anticipates the concept. In this sense, it is possible to observe how Althusser’s work has continuously put into practice – as the singular signature of his theoretical practice – something that I call the ‘detour of metaphor’ as a necessary ‘deviation’ for the production of new concepts. Without any evidence that Althusser may have known Derrida’s essay, I show how Althusser’s own theoretical work, one in which ‘metaphor’ as a philosophical theme appears to be rather anecdotic, is unexpectedly close to Derrida’s own positions concerning the margins of philosophy and its ‘outside’, the relation to the metaphysical tradition, and the importance of strategy in philosophy.
{"title":"The Detour of Metaphor: Metaphor, Concept, and Strategy in Althusser and Derrida","authors":"Vicente Montenegro Bralic","doi":"10.3366/drt.2022.0275","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2022.0275","url":null,"abstract":"Following some of the main arguments Derrida develops in ‘White Mythology’, in this article I propose an unexplored dialogue between Derrida and Althusser considering the use and the place that each of them gives to metaphor in their philosophical strategies. I give special attention to some rather isolated passages of ‘Elements of Self-Criticism’ and ‘Lenin and Philosophy’, where Althusser, against all evidence, seems to be quite aware of the importance of metaphor and mataphorization in every philosophical practice. As Balibar has argued, contrary to the metaphysical tradition, metaphor would not be the opposite but what anticipates the concept. In this sense, it is possible to observe how Althusser’s work has continuously put into practice – as the singular signature of his theoretical practice – something that I call the ‘detour of metaphor’ as a necessary ‘deviation’ for the production of new concepts. Without any evidence that Althusser may have known Derrida’s essay, I show how Althusser’s own theoretical work, one in which ‘metaphor’ as a philosophical theme appears to be rather anecdotic, is unexpectedly close to Derrida’s own positions concerning the margins of philosophy and its ‘outside’, the relation to the metaphysical tradition, and the importance of strategy in philosophy.","PeriodicalId":42836,"journal":{"name":"Derrida Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43750173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Earthbound in the Anthropocene","authors":"Chris Danta","doi":"10.3366/drt.2022.0282","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2022.0282","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42836,"journal":{"name":"Derrida Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48202395","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sophisticated deterrence theories have been proposed to justify the acquisition of nuclear weapons by countries; but they are demonstrably flawed and likely to lead to a catastrophic outcome; which has been avoided so far only thanks to the insubordination of individuals who did not follow the instructions mandated by such theories. The relevant military and political decision makers should try to escape from this dangerous situation. This is not easy; but the alternative is doom. Escape before doom might become possible after the danger of the current situation of humankind due to the presence of nuclearweapons ismorewidely understood. But it is more likely that a sufficiently potent motive for drastic changes shall emerge only after a major nuclear-weapon catastrophe caused by a diligent implementation of the sequence of the actions carefully programmed to make nuclear deterrence work. All of us—and primarily all those of us having some specific competence or professional involvement in the development and operational management of nuclear weapons (their technologies, their operational rules, and the related domestic and international politics)—especially all those who do believe their activities related to nuclear weaponry help to promote the survival of their fellow citizens and of humankind—all ought to ponder these facts and cooperate in order to move humankind away from the brink. Si vis pacem, para bellum. “If you want peace, prepare for war”. This advice was probably rather sensible in many of the occasions in which it was uttered and followed throughout human history; but these were circumstances in which the primary goal was to avoid war if at all possible, but otherwise to win the war. Now every reasonable person understands that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought” (President Ronald Reagan, 1984 State of the Union Address). Hence, any “reasonable” version of nuclear deterrence must have as its primary goal the prevention of nuclear war: indeed, of any deliberate use of nuclear weapons.
{"title":"Introduction","authors":"Francesco Vitale","doi":"10.3366/drt.2022.0272","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2022.0272","url":null,"abstract":"Sophisticated deterrence theories have been proposed to justify the acquisition of nuclear weapons by countries; but they are demonstrably flawed and likely to lead to a catastrophic outcome; which has been avoided so far only thanks to the insubordination of individuals who did not follow the instructions mandated by such theories. The relevant military and political decision makers should try to escape from this dangerous situation. This is not easy; but the alternative is doom. Escape before doom might become possible after the danger of the current situation of humankind due to the presence of nuclearweapons ismorewidely understood. But it is more likely that a sufficiently potent motive for drastic changes shall emerge only after a major nuclear-weapon catastrophe caused by a diligent implementation of the sequence of the actions carefully programmed to make nuclear deterrence work. All of us—and primarily all those of us having some specific competence or professional involvement in the development and operational management of nuclear weapons (their technologies, their operational rules, and the related domestic and international politics)—especially all those who do believe their activities related to nuclear weaponry help to promote the survival of their fellow citizens and of humankind—all ought to ponder these facts and cooperate in order to move humankind away from the brink. Si vis pacem, para bellum. “If you want peace, prepare for war”. This advice was probably rather sensible in many of the occasions in which it was uttered and followed throughout human history; but these were circumstances in which the primary goal was to avoid war if at all possible, but otherwise to win the war. Now every reasonable person understands that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought” (President Ronald Reagan, 1984 State of the Union Address). Hence, any “reasonable” version of nuclear deterrence must have as its primary goal the prevention of nuclear war: indeed, of any deliberate use of nuclear weapons.","PeriodicalId":42836,"journal":{"name":"Derrida Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46887040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：