激进无神论的论点——一些批判性的反思

IF 0.3 0 PHILOSOPHY Derrida Today Pub Date : 2019-10-25 DOI:10.3366/drt.2019.0206
Guy Elgat
{"title":"激进无神论的论点——一些批判性的反思","authors":"Guy Elgat","doi":"10.3366/drt.2019.0206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper provides a critical review of Martin Hägglund's influential Radical Atheism. The paper focuses on what Hägglund calls ‘radical atheism’: the view that according to Derrida ‘the best is the worst’. First, the paper critically examines Hägglund's reconstruction of Derrida's argument for the structure of the trace or ‘the spacing of time’. This analysis clarifies one of the central premises in Hägglund's argument for radical atheism: the ‘contamination’ claim, according to which anything temporal is open as such to the future and is thus alterable in some way. The paper then turns to highlight some of Hägglund's rhetorical slippages that seem to be supported by the contamination claim but actually move beyond what it licenses. Next, the paper focuses critically on the argument for radical atheism and shows how it relies on an unwarranted premise that lies hidden in the discussion of the structure of the trace. Finally, the second central argument that informs Hägglund's work is questioned, that is, the argument for the view that what we are always and already committed to is to live on, that is, survive, so that it is this desire for the mortal that lies behind all our desires.","PeriodicalId":42836,"journal":{"name":"Derrida Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Arguments of Radical Atheism – Some Critical Reflections\",\"authors\":\"Guy Elgat\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/drt.2019.0206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper provides a critical review of Martin Hägglund's influential Radical Atheism. The paper focuses on what Hägglund calls ‘radical atheism’: the view that according to Derrida ‘the best is the worst’. First, the paper critically examines Hägglund's reconstruction of Derrida's argument for the structure of the trace or ‘the spacing of time’. This analysis clarifies one of the central premises in Hägglund's argument for radical atheism: the ‘contamination’ claim, according to which anything temporal is open as such to the future and is thus alterable in some way. The paper then turns to highlight some of Hägglund's rhetorical slippages that seem to be supported by the contamination claim but actually move beyond what it licenses. Next, the paper focuses critically on the argument for radical atheism and shows how it relies on an unwarranted premise that lies hidden in the discussion of the structure of the trace. Finally, the second central argument that informs Hägglund's work is questioned, that is, the argument for the view that what we are always and already committed to is to live on, that is, survive, so that it is this desire for the mortal that lies behind all our desires.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42836,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Derrida Today\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-25\",\"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.2019.0206\",\"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.2019.0206","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

本文提供了一个批判性的检讨马丁Hägglund的影响激进无神论。这篇论文的重点是Hägglund所说的“激进无神论”:根据德里达的观点,“最好的就是最坏的”。首先,本文批判性地考察了Hägglund对德里达关于轨迹结构或“时间间隔”的论证的重建。这一分析澄清了Hägglund激进无神论论点的中心前提之一:“污染”主张,根据这一主张,任何暂时的东西都对未来开放,因此在某种程度上是可以改变的。然后,这篇论文转而强调了Hägglund的一些修辞上的失误,这些失误似乎得到了污染声明的支持,但实际上超出了它所许可的范围。接下来,论文批判地关注了激进无神论的论点,并展示了它是如何依赖于隐藏在痕迹结构讨论中的一个毫无根据的前提的。最后,影响Hägglund作品的第二个中心论点受到了质疑,也就是说,我们一直和已经承诺的是继续生活下去,也就是说,生存下去,因此,在我们所有的欲望背后,是对凡人的渴望。
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
The Arguments of Radical Atheism – Some Critical Reflections
The paper provides a critical review of Martin Hägglund's influential Radical Atheism. The paper focuses on what Hägglund calls ‘radical atheism’: the view that according to Derrida ‘the best is the worst’. First, the paper critically examines Hägglund's reconstruction of Derrida's argument for the structure of the trace or ‘the spacing of time’. This analysis clarifies one of the central premises in Hägglund's argument for radical atheism: the ‘contamination’ claim, according to which anything temporal is open as such to the future and is thus alterable in some way. The paper then turns to highlight some of Hägglund's rhetorical slippages that seem to be supported by the contamination claim but actually move beyond what it licenses. Next, the paper focuses critically on the argument for radical atheism and shows how it relies on an unwarranted premise that lies hidden in the discussion of the structure of the trace. Finally, the second central argument that informs Hägglund's work is questioned, that is, the argument for the view that what we are always and already committed to is to live on, that is, survive, so that it is this desire for the mortal that lies behind all our desires.
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
Large library docking for cannabinoid-1 receptor agonists with reduced side effects. Life, Would That it Might Be To Say – Power, Metaphor, Tragen, Épuis(s)ement Schizogonies: Deconstruction of Derrida’s Deconstruction of Reproduction General Editor's Note Front matter
×
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