The Ends of Man Jacques Derrida is a French philosopher who was born in 1930. He is famous for his critiques of Western philosophy and its linguistics. The analysis of the language by Derrida gives answers on basic question of philosophical thesis. Such approach is quite alternative when to compare to other philosophers. Derridas method of reading philosophic texts is usually referred as deconstruction. In Derridas books the problems of translation are specifically the one having a great importance. Derrida is frustrated how the language is confused and how many various meanings it has.
The confusion of language is explained as the relationship of the original word use and of the use of changed words, which after comparing to original have different meaning. Derrida states that man is subjected to a law of translation that is both necessary and impossible. Translation is duty and debt. It cannot be performed in a way it should be because nobody knows which meaning to use in order to make correct and appropriate interpretation. This theory greatly influenced Derridas perception of thinks that led to the development of another books dedicated to this topic. In many of his works, Derrida uses his concept of language confusion.
Overall, Derridas ideas were quite progressive. However, Derridas works were not only limited to language. The philosopher is famous for his relation to being and time and interpretation of humanism. The key points of Derridas text in The Ends of Man are dedicated to his view of concepts developed by Heidegger rather than connection with Hegel or Husserl. The book is much dedicated again to deconstruction, which can be found in introduction, and to discussion and analysis of Heidegger. It was done mainly on the history of philosophy and metaphysics in order to enable the possibility to move outside it, or in other words outside the end of man.
The Term Paper on Animal Farm- Themes / Language and Meaning
Themes Language and Meaning In Animal Farm, his allegory of the Soviet Revolution, Orwell examines the use of language and the subversion of the meaning of words by showing how the powerful manipulate words for their own benefit. As a journalist, Orwell knew the power of words to serve whichever side the writer backed. In the novel, Snowball is a quick talker who can always explain his way out of ...
The key part of the text is the context in the last two paragraphs where Derrida successfully addresses the different strategies the deconstruction might take. A lot of attention is paid to the subject of radical trembling that can only come from outside. One thing about the works is that Derrida paid close attention to the relation of thoughts to interpretation, especially with such terms as outside or the other of the West. The question that rises can be traced down to the theory of textuality, which can explain some aspects. The writing and the dislocation of forms and their presence or property are the principal thrust of Derridas work. It is also interesting to compare the concept of sexuality in society that was brought up in a different way by Derrida along with contemporary French feminists Cixous and Irigaray. Derrida did not focus a lot on gender difference in his analysis and critique.
The effort to integrate the theories of these philosophers will not be successful, because they reject the ideal of systematization favoring discontinuous approach to philosophy. However, the attempt to systematize these philosophical approaches will be useful. This is mainly due to the availability of crucial premises and methodology shared by the theories. The contradiction between feminism and critique of metaphysics arises during the systematization of philosophical approaches. The gender difference and the rejection of basic essences, which underlines itself the meaning of essence, show Derridas approach. Taking into account that there are actually gender differences, which are determined by nature or sometimes even by social environment, makes it possible to understand the necessity of commitment to some special form of sexual essence, basically, to the very metaphysics that was clearly rejected by other philosophers. Derridas critique of metaphysics together with the analysis of feminism reveals the rejection of the idea that women or men have any special or different kind of essence.
The Term Paper on Differences Between Idealism and Realism
Philosophers say the key to understanding human life is answering the really philosophical questions such as why are we here? Where did we come from? Where will we go? And so on and so forth. This has truly been a debate for the ages in philosophy, one that has stimulated thinkers, philosophers, theologists and scientists for thousands of years, hence led emergence of idealism and realism as two ...
Derrida shows that women should be equal with men in every aspect, because there is not certain space for them, consequently not special role to fill. Despite this outward rejection of essences, the very idea of sexual difference seems to carry some metaphysical connotations, for in order to have actual sexual difference, there must be some underlying difference in the essences of men and women. Derridas rejection of metaphysical opposition between men and women is mainly because of concept of reaching the first stage of deconstruction when this opposition is not being applicable anymore. The clear distinction between the concept of difference and opposition that was made by Derrida is remains unclear whether the notion of difference in gender is metaphysical or maybe just some construction that should be deconstructed. In my opinion, the notion of difference should not be metaphysical, because there is no relationship with immutable essence, which determines sexual difference. It could be possible for indefinite number of sexes to exist, but still sexual difference should not be bases on just biological differences.
However, Derrida has metaphysical problems in the account of sexual difference. Derrida seems to resolve any tension by humanistically asserting that gender identity is created and by making Aristotelian distinctions, while Irigaray resolves the tension by simply renouncing any claim to truth, and taking a more pragmatic approach to the issue of sexual difference, which still is not a solution. Perhaps these difficulties only further buttress the thrust of Derrida’s critique of Heidegger in “The Ends of Man,” namely that we can never fully escape metaphysical thinking. Derrida’s method of avoiding metaphysics by making a distinction between opposition and difference seems to be a return to metaphysics. After all, making these sorts of distinctions in order to resolve apparent contradictions is at the heart of the methodology of Aristotelian metaphysics, and so it seems self-defeating for Derrida to adopt a strategy of avoiding metaphysics that is itself metaphysical. The relationship between metaphor and philosophy is the main theme of Derridas work. Two separately identifiable, but strictly interconnected, thematic directions are closely explored. First, is the theory of metaphor; second the theory of philosophical discourse.
The Term Paper on Diversity and Cross Cultural Differences in Work places
Diversity and Cross-Cultural Differences in Workplaces Introduction Different people have different mental structures due to the diverse type of personality and cultural background. The study of psychology has enabled people to know about the mental functioning of others making it easier individuals and groups to understand one another. Since people must interact in the day-to-day ...
The works of these Derrida are examined for a number of reasons: first, they attract questions that inevitably concern the meaning of philosophy itself. Besides, they make fundamental points concerning metaphor and its relationship to philosophy. Actually, the particular quality of the language is closely related to poetic discourse; and the relationship of text to metaphor gives Derridas works an essential quality and makes it different from the works of other philosophers. The result is an idea of philosophy as essentially imperfect and self-destructive, and yet indispensable in the economy of the modes of discourse. Jacques Derrida is undoubtedly one of the foremost figures in the development of twentieth-century literary theory. The school of deconstruction that has grown out of his work has been either absorbed into the corpus of modern literary theory, or more recently criticized for its departures from the original texts of Derrida in whose name it is practiced. Several books trace Derrida’s practice of literature as a form of philosophical thinking in the work of Heidegger and Blanchot. Derridas work offers a welcome stylistic clarity in a field beleaguered by its philosophical and linguistic difficulty..
