Merci d’avance

Derrida’s work might evoke easily a constellation of motives interlaced as friendship, pardon, gift, to-come, etc. This text tries, in continuity and community with what came before, to question and to emphasize the ethical-political relation, perhaps secret and veiled, between the appearance of an expression in his last writings («X deign of this name») and the gratitude or the grace. But, what is behind this expression? The result is a logic in tuning in with others used by Derrida.La obra de Derrida podría evocarse con cierta facilidad a partir de una constelación entrelazada de motivos como la amistad, el perdón, el don, el porvenir, etc. Este texto pretende, en continuidad y comunidad con lo anterior, abrir un espacio en el que cuestionar y destacar la relación ético-política, acaso secreta y velada, entre la aparición de una expresión recurrente en sus últimos escritos («X digno de ese nombre») y la gratitud o la gracia. Pero, ¿qué hay detrás de esta expresión? El resultado es una lógica en sintonía con otras ya utilizadas por el mismo Derrida.La obra de Derrida podría evocarse con cierta facilidad a partir de una constelación entrelazada de motivos como la amistad, el perdón, el don, el porvenir, etc. Este texto pretende, en continuidad y comunidad con lo anterior, abrir un espacio en el que cuestionar y destacar la relación ético-política, acaso secreta y velada, entre la aparición de una expresión recurrente en sus últimos escritos («X digno de ese nombre») y la gratitud o la gracia. Pero, ¿qué hay detrás de esta expresión? El resultado es una lógica en sintonía con otras ya utilizadas por el mismo Derrida

Cinema as mnemotechnics

No description supplie

The Gift and the meaning-giving subject: A Reading of Given Time

In this essay the relation between justice and the gift in Derrida’s thinking is explored. The essay shows that an understanding of the ontological difference or the relation between Being and beings in Heidegger’s thinking as well as Freud’s speculations on the death drive are essential to comprehend the ‘concept’ or ‘notion’ of différance as well as the gift in Derrida’s thinking. The analysis points to the complexity of Derrida’s thinking in his contemplation of the relation between justice and law and the need for a broader investigation to understand what is at stake in this regard. An exploration of the gift shows that Derrida’s thinking on justice is not ‘relativistic’ as is often assumed and that the gift can in a certain way function as a ‘guide’ in questions of constitutional interpretation

Life and the Technical Transformation of Différance: Stiegler and the Noopolitics of Becoming Non-Inhuman

Through a re-articulation of Derridean différance, Bernard Stiegler claims that the human is defined by an originary default that displaces all psychic and social life onto technical supplements. His philosophy of technics re-articulates the logic of the supplement as concerning both human reflexivity and its supports, and the history of the différance of life itself. This has been criticised for reducing Derrida’s work to a metaphysics of presence, and for instituting a humanism of the relation to the inorganic. By refuting these claims, this article will show that Stiegler’s doubling of différance enables him to articulate the human as constituted by both the individuation characteristic of ‘life’, and that of a technical, psychic and collective individuation. Putting forward a reading of the logic of the trace in life, and emphasising the aspects of Leroi-Gourhan, Simondon, and Canguilhem that Stiegler uses in his reading of Derrida, I will demonstrate that the political stakes of adaption and adoption in Noo-Politics require this re-articulation of différance. Technics shapes the human future, arising from this differential mutation; marking the invention of the human as the site of the political

Deconstructive Aporias: Quasi-Transcendental and Normative

This paper argues that Derrida’s aporetic conclusions regarding moral and political concepts, from hospitality to democracy, can only be understood and accepted if the notion of différance and similar infrastructures are taken into account. This is because it is the infrastructures that expose and commit moral and political practices to a double and conflictual (thus aporetic) future: the conditional future that projects horizonal limits and conditions upon the relation to others, and the unconditional future without horizons of anticipation. The argument thus turns against two kinds of interpretation: the first accepts normative unconditionality in ethics but misses its support by the infrastructures. The second rejects unconditionality as a normative commitment precisely because the infrastructural support for unconditionality seems to rule out that it is normatively required. In conclusion, the article thus reconsiders the relation between a quasi-transcendental argument and its normative implications, suggesting that Derrida avoids the naturalistic fallacy

Equal consideration of all – an aporetic project?

The article considers the relationships among three arguments that purport to establish the intrinsically contradictory or paradoxical nature of the modern project aiming at the equal consideration of all. The claim that the inevitable historical insertion of universal-egalitarian norms leads to always particular and untransparent interpretations of grammatically universal norms may be combined with the claim that the logic of determination of political communities tends to generate exclusions. The combination of these two claims lends specific force to the third argument according to which equal consideration perpetually requires the non-egalitarian project of understanding (excluded) individuals on their own terms. Hence, taking off from a recent debate between Christoph Menke and Jürgen Habermas, I argue that the former is right to diagnose an aporetic self-reflection in egalitarian universalism, while agreeing with the latter about the indispensability of deliberative democratic frameworks for the defence of both egalitarian and non-egalitarian norms

Inter

No description supplie