Derrida on Being, Presence, Time

The following video of Jacques Derrida addresses some questions that I thought would be interesting to members of this pod (being, presence, time, questioning/inquiry, etc).

What Comes Before the Question?

Re: Derrida on Being, Presence, Time

Good question.

I’ll get back to it.

Re: Derrida on Being, Presence, Time

The question concerning the question, “I didn’t invent it, it came from my readings.”

“What do we mean by the word being?  Is there not something presupposed in the way we come to understand Being?  That’s not something I invented …”

Says it twice.

Trace in writing, the very condition of non-presence of the present, in order to access the present as such there must be an experience of the trace, a rapport to something else, to the Other, to something other than Being, essentially to other-than-anything-said-ness.

Sounds like Wilber’s Emptiness where anterior (prior) to the question and questioning (form) is an “experience” of the Other (capitalized, nonetheless), the trace (manifestation) of which, in writing (evolution), gives rise to deconstruction (AQAL).

“That’s not something I invented.”

Non-inventedness-in-itself, “the experience of a return to something else,” the extra-deconstructible.

Anywayyyyyyy, apart from all that, I like his sense of other and have had moments where I’ve experienced time and present and space and human and life and non-lfie and matter as othered, as “just” time, ie, viewed as from without, “just” the present, viewed as from without, and so on.  Fascinating perceptions.

Re: Derrida on Being, Presence, Time

Actually, “the trace” is Wilber’s states.

       Derridathink  —>      Wilberthink
  anterior —> prior
  question/Being —> form
  Other  —> Emptiness
  writing  —> manifestation
  the trace —>  states
  contruct —> AQAL
  decon-movement —> involution

Re: Derrida on Being, Presence, Time

Watching that Derrida clip, I could feel a rising irritation knowing the hours I’d spent reading and trying to understand Of Grammatology, among other of his texts.  “You mean all those words come down to this?  The negative othering of thought?”  Fuck.  Just say it for crying out loud.

I agree with Chomsky’s opinion of such as Derrida.  I also doubt that my relative inability to understand Derrida’s writing is due to mental incapacity.

Re: Derrida on Being, Presence, Time

Near the end of Of Grammatology, on pg 314, Derrida speaks about the ”impossibility of formulating the movement of supplementarity within the classical logos,” supplementarity, in communicated terms, being the otherness-ground to which that classical logos always refers, the trace from which that logos arises.  About this supplement and the impossibility of formulating its movement, he says:

Re: Derrida on Being, Presence, Time

lol…