正当性、事实性、规范性

IF 0.3 0 PHILOSOPHY Derrida Today Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.3366/drt.2024.0340
David Liakos
{"title":"正当性、事实性、规范性","authors":"David Liakos","doi":"10.3366/drt.2024.0340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Donner le temps II, Derrida argues that Heidegger is a thinker of ‘propriety’, which suggests that Heidegger is committed to a metaphysical strategy of assigning essential characteristics to entities and to being. This essay interrogates this claim from Derrida’s reading in Donner le temps II of Heidegger’s analytic of Dasein. Drawing on Giorgio Agamben’s critique of Derrida on this issue, we will distinguish propriety from facticity. This investigation reveals that Heidegger conceives of Dasein as facing a range of possible commitments which can become determinate but are not determined. In turn, this conception of facticity provides the basis for Heidegger’s thinking of normativity, that is, a measure for success or failure which does not assign propriety to Dasein’s character, as Steven Crowell has argued. The essay concludes that Derrida’s critique of propriety and departure from phenomenology complicate the possibility of a viable deconstructive conception of normativity.","PeriodicalId":42836,"journal":{"name":"Derrida Today","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Propriety, Facticity, Normativity\",\"authors\":\"David Liakos\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/drt.2024.0340\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Donner le temps II, Derrida argues that Heidegger is a thinker of ‘propriety’, which suggests that Heidegger is committed to a metaphysical strategy of assigning essential characteristics to entities and to being. This essay interrogates this claim from Derrida’s reading in Donner le temps II of Heidegger’s analytic of Dasein. Drawing on Giorgio Agamben’s critique of Derrida on this issue, we will distinguish propriety from facticity. This investigation reveals that Heidegger conceives of Dasein as facing a range of possible commitments which can become determinate but are not determined. In turn, this conception of facticity provides the basis for Heidegger’s thinking of normativity, that is, a measure for success or failure which does not assign propriety to Dasein’s character, as Steven Crowell has argued. The essay concludes that Derrida’s critique of propriety and departure from phenomenology complicate the possibility of a viable deconstructive conception of normativity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42836,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Derrida Today\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Derrida Today\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2024.0340\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Derrida Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2024.0340","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在《Donner le temps II》中,德里达认为海德格尔是一位 "本体论 "思想家,这表明海德格尔致力于一种形而上学的策略,为实体和存在赋予本质特征。这篇文章从德里达在《Donner le temps II》中对海德格尔的 "Dasein "分析的解读出发,对这一说法提出了质疑。借鉴乔治-阿甘本(Giorgio Agamben)在这个问题上对德里达的批判,我们将区分妥当性与事实性。这一研究揭示出,海德格尔将 "Dasein "视为面临一系列可能的承诺,这些承诺可以成为确定的,但却不是确定的。反过来,这种关于事实性的概念为海德格尔关于规范性的思考提供了基础,也就是说,正如史蒂文-克劳尔(Steven Crowell)所论证的那样,规范性是衡量成败的标准,它并不赋予达辛的特性以妥当性。文章的结论是,德里达对适当性的批判和对现象学的背离,使可行的规范性解构概念变得更加复杂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Propriety, Facticity, Normativity
In Donner le temps II, Derrida argues that Heidegger is a thinker of ‘propriety’, which suggests that Heidegger is committed to a metaphysical strategy of assigning essential characteristics to entities and to being. This essay interrogates this claim from Derrida’s reading in Donner le temps II of Heidegger’s analytic of Dasein. Drawing on Giorgio Agamben’s critique of Derrida on this issue, we will distinguish propriety from facticity. This investigation reveals that Heidegger conceives of Dasein as facing a range of possible commitments which can become determinate but are not determined. In turn, this conception of facticity provides the basis for Heidegger’s thinking of normativity, that is, a measure for success or failure which does not assign propriety to Dasein’s character, as Steven Crowell has argued. The essay concludes that Derrida’s critique of propriety and departure from phenomenology complicate the possibility of a viable deconstructive conception of normativity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Derrida Today
Derrida Today PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊最新文献
The (Anarchic) Gift of Gelassenheit: On an Undeveloped Motif in Derrida's Donner le temps II Propriety, Facticity, Normativity The Keep. Uncanny Propriation: Derrida’s Marrano Objection Between the Ocean and the Ground: Giving Surfaces Special Issue Introduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1