Derrida Was a huge philosopher Who simply learnt many of us to think in philosophy that is to say to understand The greatest figures in that realm. It is quite moving to see this very Young scholar speaking so well and so profoundly of our Master.
My god. It’s horrific. Thank you! Derrida obviously strikes as much fear in the hearts of experts as laypeople. Guess that’s what makes him so eternally fascinating.
Jesus. Have you ever seen so much agonizing public speaking anxiety crammed into one event? It’s like… I feel your pain, but I didn’t plan on feeling that much of it when I clicked on this video. “Of Grammatology” is difficult enough as it is without you forcing me to have the flop sweats by proxy twice.
I've only read one sentence by Derrida. It was: 'This then would have been a novel.' (Or is it 'book'? Something to that effect.) Then I closed the book. But I read various books about him. Also watched him say once that he prayed: 'All the time/' Also some years ago a RUclips where he said deconstructing made him feel guilty. I'm reading when I can Wittgenstein, Boethius and Baudrillard when I read philosophy. Just read Camus's 'The Fall'. All this you can all ignore.
I meant not the discussion or whatever on Derrida. I haven't watched the above. But I want to read some of the books he critiques or deconstructs etc. I would like to read his work or some to get some assessment of what he is about via the primary texts. I have read one essay (Differance), have read some Heidegger who I think is interesting. Some of Nietzsche. More recently Boethius and works by Rousseau, the one I liked most so far by the latter was his 'Confessions'. Wittgenstein -- I read his Tractatus. I like the way he questions things continually and poses "dilemmas" or thoughts about thought and language. Also his PI and some of his Foundations of Mathematics. Derrida and W I find fascinating even without reading (almost nothing). But Roland Barhes and again more recently Baudrillard is interesting. All this withoug viewing the video above.
Mr. Moderator and others, please, please do not read from the prepared text. Instead, curculate it to the audience while sharing a link to the document for the global readers. This way, you don't make murderous mistakes of names of scholars in your speech.
I really can't believe anyone still reads Derrida. I studied with Gayatri Spivak when Derrida was at his peak reputation. She was terrific, for sure, but not even her mesmerizing teaching could make me take this seriously. Read Quine, Russell, and Wittgenstein instead.
15min like mockingly less than the time Derrida spent "authoring" his spermaltozoiding of faces for which he went into an imaginary fit of rage and tog-of-war, the only antagonisms he was willing to "expose his skin in", for some honorary degree from some Uni in England that insisted he was way to rad to sign his name on the dotted line.
He also has a Nietzschean and Heideggerian interest in getting up-close to brutalized immigrants, and entering into fits of imaginary rivalry when not addressed. Besides all the other venues for thought and action that he opened.
Addendum to the perplexed: Joyce was dead before Derrida hit puberty. Beckett had published all of his major works prior to any of Derrida's books being published :-) Stay informed, kids.
@@coyoterooves Yes, unfortunatedly they dont care. Foucault claims to have developed and invented the concept of energy in Physics as well as manners. And Derridad claims that the accomplishment of the civil rights movements, in commanding moral duty against murder, is all due to him and Avitall Ronell. It can be see in his response to balibar I believe. Also insist on enacting orginal sin methods while wearing a puffy jacket.
@@coyoterooves No en el caso de ellos. Todos los postmodernistas insisten en este tipo de atribucion. Foucault insiste que el descubrio y desarrollo lo que en fisica se conoce como "energia". El, despues de Nietzsche lo llama poder. Derrida simplemente es un crimen academico despues de otro. Insistiendo que estudios cientificos como analysis Lacaniano y Economia-Policia Marxista son "Meta-Narrativas". Derrida insiste que el no tiene un sistema y su teoria es sin ningun problema aplicada como una teoria general de amplio alcanze. Lo cual no es un problema pero si lo es su proibicion soblre teorias generales aka sistemas. Sus libros los denomina como cientificos para despues decir que no que no son cientificos. Sus ejemplos de "playfulness" son funciones algebraicas generativas bien definidas y no son ningung tipo de sin principios gerarquicos "rizomas". Esa gente lo unico que a contribuido es a quemar libros y negar educacion publica. Deleuze dice que esta mas alla de avances, proofs, sobre estudios de la mente (Idealismo Aleman) y lo que hace es cambiarle el nombre. En vez de decir "la logica del movimiento que constituye un objeto" el dice "fluidez" y haci van. Pero su legado empirico en la acadmia es obscurantista y genocida. Esto aplica a todo "academico" incluyendo Einsteins like Chomsky. El cual hablo de "fraudes Franceces" etc.
@@coyoterooves Derrida, habiertamente, toma credito por el trabajo y los triunfos que los grupos civiles tuvieron en EEUU. El mismo lo dice en su "talk" en Ingles respondiendo a Balibar.
Derrida Was a huge philosopher Who simply learnt many of us to think in philosophy that is to say to understand The greatest figures in that realm. It is quite moving to see this very Young scholar speaking so well and so profoundly of our Master.
Our Master? Surely Derrida would believe in no such balderdash. Master and slave... Duh!
14:00 is when it begins... Almost 😂
Sydney Epps thanks. all the presentation before is a pain in the neck
My god. It’s horrific. Thank you! Derrida obviously strikes as much fear in the hearts of experts as laypeople. Guess that’s what makes him so eternally fascinating.
Excellent.
Is it a requirement after reading Derrida to dress like you’re in a stage production of The Matrix?
গায়ত্রী চক্রবর্তী (gayatri chakravorty) is pronounced as gaĕòttri t͡ʃɔkkròbòr(t)ti. please pronounce correctly.
Jesus. Have you ever seen so much agonizing public speaking anxiety crammed into one event? It’s like… I feel your pain, but I didn’t plan on feeling that much of it when I clicked on this video. “Of Grammatology” is difficult enough as it is without you forcing me to have the flop sweats by proxy twice.
Weird its almost as if bookish, introverted academics are bad at public speaking, hunh... Crazy.
15:24min he would.
16:20min That is plagiarism. It is called an "immanent critique" at least from Hegel.
I've only read one sentence by Derrida. It was: 'This then would have been a novel.' (Or is it 'book'? Something to that effect.) Then I closed the book. But I read various books about him. Also watched him say once that he prayed: 'All the time/' Also some years ago a RUclips where he said deconstructing made him feel guilty. I'm reading when I can Wittgenstein, Boethius and Baudrillard when I read philosophy. Just read Camus's 'The Fall'. All this you can all ignore.
weirdo
I meant not the discussion or whatever on Derrida. I haven't watched the above. But I want to read some of the books he critiques or deconstructs etc. I would like to read his work or some to get some assessment of what he is about via the primary texts. I have read one essay (Differance), have read some Heidegger who I think is interesting. Some of Nietzsche. More recently Boethius and works by Rousseau, the one I liked most so far by the latter was his 'Confessions'. Wittgenstein -- I read his Tractatus. I like the way he questions things continually and poses "dilemmas" or thoughts about thought and language. Also his PI and some of his Foundations of Mathematics. Derrida and W I find fascinating even without reading (almost nothing). But Roland Barhes and again more recently Baudrillard is interesting. All this withoug viewing the video above.
why do derridians all dress that way
1:36:53
Mr. Moderator and others, please, please do not read from the prepared text. Instead, curculate it to the audience while sharing a link to the document for the global readers. This way, you don't make murderous mistakes of names of scholars in your speech.
I really can't believe anyone still reads Derrida. I studied with Gayatri Spivak when Derrida was at his peak reputation. She was terrific, for sure, but not even her mesmerizing teaching could make me take this seriously. Read Quine, Russell, and Wittgenstein instead.
15min like mockingly less than the time Derrida spent "authoring" his spermaltozoiding of faces for which he went into an imaginary fit of rage and tog-of-war, the only antagonisms he was willing to "expose his skin in", for some honorary degree from some Uni in England that insisted he was way to rad to sign his name on the dotted line.
He might have been a "great philosopher" but do we grovel to such obsessive academics?
He also has a Nietzschean and Heideggerian interest in getting up-close to brutalized immigrants, and entering into fits of imaginary rivalry when not addressed. Besides all the other venues for thought and action that he opened.
Guide to the perplex claims that Beckett was influenced by Derrida same for Joyce.
Addendum to the perplexed: Joyce was dead before Derrida hit puberty. Beckett had published all of his major works prior to any of Derrida's books being published :-) Stay informed, kids.
@@coyoterooves Yes, unfortunatedly they dont care. Foucault claims to have developed and invented the concept of energy in Physics as well as manners. And Derridad claims that the accomplishment of the civil rights movements, in commanding moral duty against murder, is all due to him and Avitall Ronell. It can be see in his response to balibar I believe. Also insist on enacting orginal sin methods while wearing a puffy jacket.
@@gonzogil123
Les blagues ne se traduisent jamais bien, n'est-ce pas ?
@@coyoterooves No en el caso de ellos. Todos los postmodernistas insisten en este tipo de atribucion. Foucault insiste que el descubrio y desarrollo lo que en fisica se conoce como "energia". El, despues de Nietzsche lo llama poder.
Derrida simplemente es un crimen academico despues de otro. Insistiendo que estudios cientificos como analysis Lacaniano y Economia-Policia Marxista son "Meta-Narrativas".
Derrida insiste que el no tiene un sistema y su teoria es sin ningun problema aplicada como una teoria general de amplio alcanze. Lo cual no es un problema pero si lo es su proibicion soblre teorias generales aka sistemas.
Sus libros los denomina como cientificos para despues decir que no que no son cientificos. Sus ejemplos de "playfulness" son funciones algebraicas generativas bien definidas y no son ningung tipo de sin principios gerarquicos "rizomas".
Esa gente lo unico que a contribuido es a quemar libros y negar educacion publica. Deleuze dice que esta mas alla de avances, proofs, sobre estudios de la mente (Idealismo Aleman) y lo que hace es cambiarle el nombre. En vez de decir "la logica del movimiento que constituye un objeto" el dice "fluidez" y haci van.
Pero su legado empirico en la acadmia es obscurantista y genocida. Esto aplica a todo "academico" incluyendo Einsteins like Chomsky.
El cual hablo de "fraudes Franceces" etc.
@@coyoterooves Derrida, habiertamente, toma credito por el trabajo y los triunfos que los grupos civiles tuvieron en EEUU. El mismo lo dice en su "talk" en Ingles respondiendo a Balibar.
Blah blah
2:10:06