Humanities Translation Series: Deconstruction and the Future of Thought

Author: Jacques Derrida (France)
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2006-05-01
Features: The philosopher has passed away. This reader was compiled out of remembrance and nostalgia. This reader marks the beginning of our efforts to edit and translate Derrida's series of works. Selecting from Derrida's numerous texts was undoubtedly very difficult, so we have tried to choose some independent and important writings to avoid fragmentation. We primarily follow the three stages of Derrida's own broadly recognized philosophical thought as a thread to give readers an overview of the general development of his ideas. These stages are three discussion seminars on the significance of Derrida's thought held at the famous French cultural and intellectual center, Cerisy-la-Salle: 1980: The End of Man; 1992: The Passage of the Boundary; 1997: The Animal's Biography—these three progressive "themes" actually run through Derrida's entire philosophical thought, but they are not a linear development process (from man to animal), but rather unpredictable unique events that intersect and constantly change tone. At the th conference, Derrida delivered the paper On a Recently Elevated Eschatological Tone in Philosophy, which was a response to Kant's same-themed work and also a response to the much-discussed postmodernism of everything "coming to an end." Derrida did not agree with or endorse these so-called "end" discourses. Of course, since the early three major works—Voice and Phenomenon, Of Grammatology, and Writing and Difference—already have Chinese translations, we mainly selected a very important text on the issue of time from The Edge of Philosophy to show Derrida's meticulous reading of the core issues of the philosophical tradition. Due to space limitations, we did not translate another text titled Plato's Pharmacy, which was included in Dissemination. As a supplement, we translated the later and more important text Khora, which is related to Plato. Here, Derrida's deconstruction of Plato and the entire Western philosophical tradition has gone far beyond what was previously thought. The text The Limit of the Finite is the paper Derrida delivered at the second conference, exploring the "transcendence of the boundary" or the intersection of the finite. This is synchronized with his reflections on the ghost, mourning, the other, and gender difference. The thought The Animal I Am (More to Follow), which deals with the animal's biography, serves as the introductory text for the third conference. Derrida's reflections on animals completely transcend the entire Western philosophical tradition—whether Greek philosophy or the great religious tradition of the three monotheistic gods in the Holy Scriptures. The focus on animals at the third conference means that the expansion of deconstruction has gone far beyond what we could have predicted.
Part: The philosopher's self-farewell and farewell to the other. The text that begins with farewell is mourning—the theme that the philosopher so loved. First is an open dialogue shortly before Derrida's death, where the dying philosopher faces death with composure and speaks eloquently about his personal life and his uncompromising response to the spirit of the times: the "indestructible" temperament of thought—a firm response to the numerous accusations against "deconstruction." Derrida knew in 2002 that he had cancer and that his days on earth were numbered. Before his death, he engaged in extensive dialogues and wrote with his friends and students, including the texts mentioned at the beginning of this dialogue and the books he wrote under the shadow of death. Perhaps, after Plato's "Socrates" and Moses in the Bible, no one has prepared for death in such a philosophical or intellectual way in advance? Before Derrida's death, he compiled a collection of eulogies and mourning texts he wrote for his friends who had passed away: first appearing in English as The Work of Mourning, later renamed Every Time, the Only One Is the End of the World in French. Each writing toward death is a prayer and a salvation, and in this final confession, there are the philosopher's last words or will, traces of survival writing, and an unparalleled love for life. Then is his eulogy for Levinas after his death, where the echoes of "farewell" continue to linger. Farewell to the other is also a farewell to oneself. The polysemy of the word "farewell" has always been intertwined with past philosophy and future thought.
The second part begins with a dialogue in English where Derrida directly confronts the issue of deconstruction and the basic "characteristics" of his thought. Derrida succinctly responds to the relevant questions, serving as an introductory text. The second text, The Limit, is the keynote speech from the second conference, a complete text on the "limit" of the finite, where Derrida meticulously discusses the various possible modalities of the finite, logical puzzles, and the existential dilemma of the possibility and impossibility of death. Derrida's reflections on the relationship between possibility and impossibility also transcend the one-sided demand of traditional "transcendental philosophy" for possibility, reflecting his internal relationship with and transcendence of traditional philosophy. This further extends to a series of "limits" on gifts, friendship, kindness, and forgiveness. At the same time, the Western tradition is pluralistic and interwoven, without a pure distinction between Greek and Jewish traditions—because of the mediation, integration, and filtering of Christianity. Therefore, it is necessary to connect philosophy with the overall deconstruction of the entire monotheistic religious tradition, which is particularly evident in the text on "Animal Biography" from the third conference's keynote speech—The Animal I Am. It condenses the essence of Derrida's recent ten years of reflection on animals or animal sovereignty, where he also outlines the "animal series" in his own texts. Derrida's reflections on animals deconstruct the entire Western thought: whether it is the "bios" of a beautiful life in Greek philosophy—those who advocate for a so-called beautiful life have not even questioned what "life" is? Bios or zoē? If classical political philosophy is built on the distinction between humans and animals (humans are the political/urban animal), and if this distinction, along with virtue ethics and natural justice, are all based on this premise, then it is possible that they have not thought about or faced the question of what an animal is? This means that simply returning to classical thought is too simplistic! Moreover, reflecting on animals also means deconstructing the monotheistic tradition: Abraham's monotheism was founded on the sacrifice and offering of animals! Derrida also reflects on a series of animals in Greek mythology and philosophy, particularly the relationship between Socrates (as a gadfly and others) and animals, which guides his subsequent texts. In more texts, Derrida deconstructs the specific reflections of figures like Descartes, Heidegger, Levinas, and Lacan on animals, delving into the inner pulse of Western thought. Therefore, it is impossible to solve these problems simply by returning to classical thought or merely inheriting modernity. Instead, one should more thoroughly advance Heidegger's thought and, in the future, in the consequences of technology, reflect on questions that the tradition has not considered.
The third part shows that as a philosopher by birth, Derrida's deconstruction first occurs within philosophy, particularly in the deconstruction of the Greek beginning of thought, that is, the deconstruction of the writings of Aristotle and Plato. First, we attempt to listen to the philosopher's own direct "defense" of his complex relationship with tradition. Deconstruction is not negation but reading it according to the internal laws of tradition, unraveling or expanding its internal tensions, and reawakening its vitality. At the same time, it interprets and rewrites at the "edge" of the text, both within it and in what it excludes. Starting with a small footnote to Heidegger's Being and Time, deconstruction is particularly strange because, at the time, Derrida independently repeated Heidegger's reflections without having read Heidegger's detailed analysis of Aristotle's problem of time in The Basic Problems of Phenomenology. Derrida's interpretation permeates the core difficulties or limits of Aristotle, Hegel, and Kant's reflections on time. This deeply penetrating text into the texture of the text is one of the most exquisite deconstructive texts, as well as a philosophy text that is unyielding in its reflections on the difficulties of "limits." The study of time-space undoubtedly marks one of the signs of a true philosopher. In this text, Derrida fully demonstrates the "double writing" of deconstructing traditional metaphysics—impossible to dream of starting anew without the entire tradition, but also impossible to write only within it; instead, one must turn to the other. Then there is the text Khora, which differs from the earlier Plato's Pharmacy. Here, Derrida focuses on the construction of the textual fabric around Plato's Timaeus, and this text differs from the previous one in that it is no longer written in the traditional, argumentative style of a philosophical paper but in a more "deconstructive" mode of thought writing. It revolves around the indeterminate and undecided position of Khora—Socrates as a "philosopher" (also an irony of the philosopher), as an indeterminate, unoccupiable, and only a receiver that must constantly erase itself—and the internal difficulties of narrative writing. Khora is also the "third kind" that cannot be named, which points to the future of nameless thought. But for Derrida, the word Khora itself, this "name," has already surpassed Plato and Platonism in the entire Western tradition or even the text itself. It is a completely unknown, new thought that even Plato himself could not claim exclusively. The writing of the text itself is also unattributable, no longer philosophical but philosophical.
Of course, it is also important to note that the deconstruction of Greece and the deconstruction of monotheism are intertwined. The Western tradition is pluralistic and interwoven, without a clear distinction between Greek and Jewish traditions—through the mediation, integration, and filtering of Christianity, this distinction has become layered and blurred. Therefore, it is necessary to think about and deconstruct the entire monotheistic religious tradition as a whole. In his early work Writing and Difference, Derrida already addressed and questioned the "Greek-Jewish" distinction in texts by Levinas, Heidegger, and Jabès. However, the deconstruction of Christianity was carried out under the influence of Nancy, which is the thinking of Christianity as "hapax-theology." The selected text on touch is the prelude to a later book by him. The thinking of touch permeates the inner essence of the entire Western thought and is also a new contribution to phenomenology. By re-examining Derrida's early phenomenology in this way, we will gain a deeper and clearer understanding of Derrida's relationship with phenomenology.
Additionally, in this text given to Nancy on touch, we can see how Derrida handles the appropriateness and difficulties of the rules of "touching" or "contact." How to respond to a friend's thoughts while touching them without offending them? How to face the paradox of "the untouchable touch" with "the ethics of reading"? This is another example of deconstructive ethical writing and the gift of friendship, and the language is extremely beautiful. Moreover, the text "Who to Give?" selected from the crucial text Given Death is a condensed discussion of the themes of gift, sacrifice, and death (including animal sacrifice). This text focuses on the story of Abraham sacrificing his son Isaac in the Bible and compares the interpretations of this event by Kierkegaard, representing Christianity, and Levinas, representing Judaism, as well as the reflections on the peculiar character Bartleby's "idiom" in Melville's novel. It questions why Western religion has always taken "sacrifice" as its premise and death as the condition for gift, and whether it is possible to transcend this sacrifice? The result, does this mean transcending the entire monotheistic tradition? Nancy and Derrida's recent deconstruction of Christianity and monotheism have profound implications for the present and the future (see the relevant texts in our Beginning Series).
Additionally, regarding Derrida's relationship with Judaism and general ethics, we have selected a text dedicated to Levinas. Under the premise of responding to Levinas, who is the inheritor of ethical thinking and Jewish thought, Derrida does not "return" or "repay" Levinas's thought (his initials are E.L). He must respond to Levinas's thought (especially his Jewish thought) as a responsibility of the ethics of reading, but also give his own understanding, even reaching—neither Levinas's nor his own thought, but rather—some indistinguishable thought for the future, beyond himself and the other. The complexity and limits of deconstructive writing have always been unpredictable. In this text, Derrida plays with the name E.L of Levinas—this could be the abbreviation of the name of the Jewish God, but also suggests the multiplicity of the French personal pronoun elle (it or she). Therefore, Derrida's interlocutor or recipient (), but it could also be given to an indeterminate woman, and the voice of women is scattered among them. This is both a question about Levinas's reflections on women and a challenge to the phallic centrism presupposed by Western religion, and so on. This text shows us the wonderful feature of deconstruction as a "gift" and its retreat, as well as the ethics of reading, how to respond to the other in the way of thought variability. Derrida shows us another "example." This also requires us to respond to Derrida in Derrida's way, while also inspiring our own personal thoughts, and there is no ready-made way to teach us this. Unfortunately, many current Chinese academic studies of Derrida are not "Derrida-style."
The opening text, Faith and Knowledge, provides a general grasp of Western religion. This text is profoundly deep, and the surface and content of the text have connections with the "cryptic book," and there is still much to discover (for example, the number 44 corresponds to the "blink" of the two eyes that signifies the "instant" of the Wink of the coming god). In the reflection on the dominant characteristics of the technology of the times and the two sources of religion, "messianic messianism" and the "not names of names" Khora open the possibility of future faith thinking. Therefore, it is no longer possible to reconstruct faith within the framework of traditional religious theology, but we must face the possibility of technology and its future development, especially in this era of thorough transformation.
Additionally, deconstruction in general (if there is such a "general" at all) or the deconstruction of religion has permeated all other fields, but there is no ready-made deconstructive operational method or model that can be applied everywhere. Instead, each time it must write uniquely in the uniqueness of the specific text and situation. Deconstruction has expanded in politics, law, and Marxist political thought. See the relevant texts in And Others. Especially in the book The Political Economy of Friendship.
Since there is already a Chinese version of The Literary Action, we did not select the literary part this time. At the same time, readers should pay attention to reading all the articles in the reader throughly. The deconstruction of philosophy inevitably intertwines with the deconstruction of theology, whether it is ontological theology or philosophical religion. The conflict between philosophy and faith is also intertwined. For example, the text Khora, the text Animal Biography, especially the latter, Derrida's reflections on the animal question are both a deconstruction of the entire Western philosophical tradition and a deconstruction of the three monotheistic religious traditions. The monotheistic religious traditions opened by Abraham all realize themselves through sacrificial rituals (the political crisis of the 9/11 event and the current political crisis in the Middle East are their complete manifestations). Whether it is Kierkegaard or Levinas, neither has further thought: although God ultimately stopped Abraham from sacrificing Isaac, why was a ram ultimately used as a substitute?—this substitution is worth thinking about? Moreover, it continued the sacrificial activities. Not only that, Derrida deconstructs the first few narrations in the beginning of the Genesis, particularly focusing on the relationship between humans and animals, revealing the connection between the "second sin" and animal sacrifice. Animals were originally in the position of creation before humans, but in naming and language, they came after. The interweaving between them is worth considering. At the same time, he reflects on the complex image of the "fire-breathing monster" in Greek and Roman mythology. These hints and guiding thoughts force us to reconsider the traditional relationship between body and soul or body, the relationship between humans and gods, humans and machines, humans and animals, and so on! Especially, it deepens the deconstruction of meat-eating centrism. Derrida's thought transcends the boundaries of the entire Western thought, , making thought a world-wide thought. Derrida's thought belongs to the world, here is the new beginning of future thought. Derrida's reflections on religion are very extensive and rich (see the English edition of Religious Action by the English editors to feel this), but limited by space and time, we did not select more texts. Readers are forgiven and look forward to the future editing of corresponding texts to make up for it.