I’ve never had significant problems with reading Derrida, but I suppose it would be dull if we all thought the same thing. C’est la vie…
What you have here is the black phenotype struggling with the complexity and sophistication of the modern world and, as usual, rejecting it.
I really don’t think we should take anything this person says seriously. Even he would, I suspect, ultimately dismiss philosophy in favor of something more physically orientated like rap or hip hop.
Or perhaps he just doesn’t subscribe to that brand of philosophy, Leander - I, myself, don’t subscribe to much Western philosophy, save for certain quotes by certain individuals, as I feel most of it does not pertain to me.
He does not like Derrida. Join the club. He never says who he prefers, however. I might be the greatest philosopher, because I haven’t read him, as hoodie has. I have read a lot about him, though. The “general economy” is what interests me about the deconstructionists. No idea or occurrence is too small to be of importance in it, in it’s interplay. It’s Nietzschean to me in it’s relation to the eternal return, especially where Nietzche says that everything shall recur eternally, yes even that spider web. The general economy, and, the eternal recurrence, both stress the importance of the interconnection of all existence, no matter how seemingly insignificant. An eternal chain of events, if you will. No stone left unturned.
But he doesn’t subscribe because he doesn’t seem to understand it. He called Derrida’s work gibberish.
“There ain’t no sense to be made” - The Hooded Negro.
Since he has foregrounded race in his choice of moniker he should be deconstructed on those grounds forthwith.
Leander - So, if I called myself “White Guy” you’d feel safe judging all white guys by what I write? THN is making a lot more sense than you are. Derrida is actually alternates between gibberish and the trivially obvious. But I split hairs.
You are a white man Faust.
So yes I would.
Interesting take on induction, Leander.
I mean, why waste time with overly-large samples?
In psychology/sociology samples end up distorting reality so I bypass them Faust.
would you rather have a distorted perception of reality or no perception of reality at all?
However did life manage to evolve without sociologists and marketing gurus?
Without any marketing surveys done on the functional utility of the eye it’s astounding it garnered almost unanimous acceptance throughout the animal kingdom.
There must be some other mechanism at work, one which is invisible to our sociology professors in their horn rimmed specs and comfy slippers.
Nature has given me all the mental faculties I need to perceive reality clearly, but I am deterred from using them by postmodern thinkers and yes men.
I should be more like the subjects in the Asch Conformity Experiments.
The Hooded Negro looks just like everyone else to me.
:-&
He does? You seemed to notice the color of his skin.
My God!
Are you accusing me of racism?
Let me state for the record that things such as races do not exist, in fact, never existed! No siree! I never saw one of them.
Not ever.
They’re just fairy tales made up by inbred losers from Mississippi to compensate for their personal failures. Mississippi is a place I’ve never been to and have no intention of visiting, I might add. I’ve no desire to become infected by some inferiority complex which results in me seeing physical differences between groups of humans - differences which are, of course, complete hallucinations.
Differences don’t exist, I believe quantum physics and postmodern philosophers have proven it. It’s now only a matter of time before the word ‘difference’ is removed from the dictionary, along with the word ‘dinosaur’.
Dinosaur fossils were only put there to test our faith.
They don’t exist either.
You never saw a race? I’m confused.
Entirely my mistake.
I really never cared much for Derrida or what he was about until I took a course on the Holocaust that was taught by a German academic. And it was made abundantly clear that you can’t truly appreciate D. without considering the impact that the second world war and anti semitism (which was rife in France during Derrida’s childhood) played in the formation of Derrida’s philosophy. Also there was a peculiar interpretation of Hegelian Dialectics native to France which supposedly accounts for god knows what, but the explanation made sense at the time.
Still, the one thing that bothers me (and other people, so I am told) is that Derrida went out of his way to defend Heidegger, to the extent he gave a ten hour speech (which later became a book) all about one word… Spirit, just to explain away Heidegger’s sad involvement with the Nazis.
In a sense I think it was approriate that the Hooded Negro mentioned them, because, in his attempt to excuse the inexcusable, Derrida became just another sophist.