反对海德格尔

IF 0.2 4区 文学 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM
François Raffoul
{"title":"反对海德格尔","authors":"François Raffoul","doi":"10.3366/OLR.2021.0352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Derrida's relation to Heidegger can fairly be described as ‘complicated,’ and marked by a deep ambivalence. Although he has always recognized his debt towards Heidegger, Derrida has also insisted on his profound allergy towards some aspects of Heidegger’s thought. The reader is thus often faced with this ambivalence in Derrida's writings, which offer, on the one hand, uncannily precise and insightful readings of Heidegger's texts, with on the other hand less than generous interpretations. We find a Derrida tout contre Heidegger, at once entirely against Heidegger, but also right up close to Heidegger. I will explore this debate between Derrida and Heidegger by focusing on the motifs of deconstruction, presence, the proper and the inappropriable.","PeriodicalId":43403,"journal":{"name":"OXFORD LITERARY REVIEW","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tout contre Heidegger\",\"authors\":\"François Raffoul\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/OLR.2021.0352\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Derrida's relation to Heidegger can fairly be described as ‘complicated,’ and marked by a deep ambivalence. Although he has always recognized his debt towards Heidegger, Derrida has also insisted on his profound allergy towards some aspects of Heidegger’s thought. The reader is thus often faced with this ambivalence in Derrida's writings, which offer, on the one hand, uncannily precise and insightful readings of Heidegger's texts, with on the other hand less than generous interpretations. We find a Derrida tout contre Heidegger, at once entirely against Heidegger, but also right up close to Heidegger. I will explore this debate between Derrida and Heidegger by focusing on the motifs of deconstruction, presence, the proper and the inappropriable.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43403,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"OXFORD LITERARY REVIEW\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"OXFORD LITERARY REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/OLR.2021.0352\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OXFORD LITERARY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/OLR.2021.0352","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

德里达与海德格尔的关系可以被描述为“复杂”,并以深刻的矛盾心理为特征。德里达虽然一直承认自己对海德格尔的亏欠,但他也坚持对海德格尔思想的某些方面有深刻的反感。因此,读者在德里达的作品中经常面临这种矛盾心理,一方面,德里达的作品提供了对海德格尔文本的惊人的精确和深刻的解读,另一方面,德里达的作品却没有给出慷慨的解释。我们发现德里达是一个反对海德格尔的人,他既完全反对海德格尔,又非常接近海德格尔。我将探讨德里达和海德格尔之间的争论,重点关注解构、存在、适当和不适当的主题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tout contre Heidegger
Derrida's relation to Heidegger can fairly be described as ‘complicated,’ and marked by a deep ambivalence. Although he has always recognized his debt towards Heidegger, Derrida has also insisted on his profound allergy towards some aspects of Heidegger’s thought. The reader is thus often faced with this ambivalence in Derrida's writings, which offer, on the one hand, uncannily precise and insightful readings of Heidegger's texts, with on the other hand less than generous interpretations. We find a Derrida tout contre Heidegger, at once entirely against Heidegger, but also right up close to Heidegger. I will explore this debate between Derrida and Heidegger by focusing on the motifs of deconstruction, presence, the proper and the inappropriable.
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
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Oxford Literary Review, founded in the 1970s, is Britain"s oldest journal of literary theory. It is concerned especially with the history and development of deconstructive thinking in all areas of intellectual, cultural and political life. In the past, Oxford Literary Review has published new work by Derrida, Blanchot, Barthes, Foucault, Lacoue-Labarthe, Nancy, Cixous and many others, and it continues to publish innovative and controversial work in the tradition and spirit of deconstruction. Planned issues include ‘Writing and Immortality’, "Word of War" and ‘Deconstruction and Environmentalism’.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信