Derrida: Gift

This paper addresses ‘the gift’ as the central concept in a discussion about the literacy education for new immigrants that has been developing in Taiwan since the early 1990s. The point of departure for this discussion is the advent of international marriages that are the consequence of new arrivals from Southeast Asia and China, and their effect guest/host relationship. In the first half of the article, I apply Marcel Mauss' idea of gift in order to examine the interactions within this (...) host/guest relationship, engaging the ideologies that underpin the new immigrants' literacy education, and the ways in which new immigrants are identified in Taiwanese society. In the second half of this article, I use Jacques Derrida's critique of Mauss' theory of the gift to explore Derrida's own idea of the gift, with the particular objective of evaluating the question of how national identity in Taiwanese society relates to the new immigrants' literacy education policy. (shrink)

Is it possible to think of the gift philosophically? How should we think of the gift in a world that seems to be regulated only with economic rules? These are two of the main questions that are treated in this essay. In order to deal with them, the author analyzes Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction of the gift and Jean-Luc Marion’s notion of givenness. Derrida and Marion are in agreement in refusing intentionality as an essential element of the logic of gift because (...) for them intentionality is always connected with economy. But they conceive economics in different ways and, as a consequence, their conceptions of gift are different. For Derrida, economics means credit and debit, while for Marion it means causality. This difference is the reason why Derrida thinks of the gift as either impossible or a moment of madness that overcomes credit and debit, while Marion thinks of it as a pure decision that comes from its givenness. As a result, for neither author does the gift have any element of need, motivation, or cause. The author argues that excess and decision cannot be the essence of the gift, but only reciprocity. This reciprocity is not an economic relation of giving and receiving but an asymmetrical reciprocity. (shrink)

This book deals with theories of the gift, in particular in contemporary French philosophy. The gift can be regarded as a preliminary stage of complex economical procedures. But it can also be understood as a phenomenon that transgresses the structures of economy. In the act of exchanging gifts, the agents symbolize their interpersonal relationship and mutual recognition. It is pointed out that the praxis of the gift can be considered as an essential form of any socio-cultural interaction, as an essential (...) concept of phenomenological thought, and as a model for the particular character of the exchange of knowledge, skills and philosophical wisdom in general. (shrink)

Recent attempts by American theorists to produce a radical politics, characterized by the effort to translate the insights of Continental philosophy into a political register, remain trapped in that which they purport to transcend: the metaphysics of subjectivity. In their essential determinations, the works of William Connolly, Stephen White, Richard Ashley, etc. remain firmly anchored in a traditional liberal schema. The reason for this is that while these efforts have sought to de-center political identity by exposing its relational character they (...) have not re-thought 'rela tionality' itself. Our attempt to develop the more profound political impli cations of 'relationality' unfolds through a synthetic explication of Martin Heidegger's analysis of language, Jacques Derrida's logic of the gift, and Emmanuel Levinas' consideration of the Other. The emergent thematic of asymmetrical relationality reconfigures liberalism and provides for a rethinking of the structure of welfare. (shrink)

My thesis offers a philosophical and psychological examination of our ability to forgive strangers post-atrocity. Forgiveness is often considered impossible because atrocities involve unforgivable violations of moral values. Viewed through the lens of deconstruction, however, it is precisely where forgiveness seems impossible that it becomes possible, and more importantly, necessary in order to curb the desire for vengeance. Granting this radical understanding of the value of forgiveness---the ability to forgive the unforgivable---what hinders our ability to forgive? My work focuses on (...) public vindictiveness towards Karla Homolka, who was released in 2005, having served her 12-year sentence for her role in the rape and murder of 14-year-old Leslie Mahaffy and 15-year-old Kristen French. My thesis aims to show how reflective engagement with forgiveness can tell us something about ourselves as ethical persons by demonstrating how and why our ongoing resentment towards others is often morally unjustified. (shrink)

For a long time the call for justice has been heard as a call to settle accounts---to give people what they deserve, to pay what is owed. It is widely accepted that the fair treatment of persons involves a certain economy of desert, a certain tracking of moral credits and debts. As such, justice seems to be wholly distinct from gift-giving. As Derrida has argued, to have a gift, there must be no exchange, no debt incurred or paid. Historically, philosophers (...) have drawn this distinction between justice and gift-giving as a distinction between the moral and then nonmoral, between two different areas of ethics , or between two different approaches to ethics . I explore another way of viewing the dynamics of this distinction: How might justice operate within the asymmetries of gift-giving? Are there ways in which the rights and responsibilities of justice function outside the machinery of exchange? Through a careful reading of the works of Soren Kierkegaard, Jacques Derrida, and Emmanuel Levinas, I explore how he paradoxical intersection of justice and gift could lead to transcending old borders, and thinking about justice in a new way. First, I examine the philosophical difficulties that have been associated with the gift, especially when it is placed in the context of ethics. Second, I argue that Levinas' analysis of asymmetrical responsibility and the tout autre, read through the lens of Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling, troubles the economy of justice. Third, I argue that forgiveness is a gift that is not only compatible with justice, but, in many cases, indistinguishable from it. (shrink)

Along with Husserl's Ideas and Heidegger's Being and Time, Being Given is one of the classic works of phenomenology in the twentieth century. Through readings of Kant, Husserl, Heidegger, Derrida, and twentieth-century French phenomenology (e.g., Merleau-Ponty, Levinas, and Henry), it ventures a bold and decisive reappraisal of phenomenology and its possibilities. Its author's most original work to date, the book pushes phenomenology to its limits in an attempt to redefine and recover the phenomenological ideal, which the author argues has never (...) been realized in any of the historical phenomenologies. Against Husserl's reduction to consciousness and Heidegger's reduction to Dasein, the author proposes a third reduction to givenness, wherein phenomena appear unconditionally and show themselves from themselves at their own initiative. Being Given is the clearest, most systematic response to questions that have occupied its author for the better part of two decades. The book articulates a powerful set of concepts that should provoke new research in philosophy, religion, and art, as well as at the intersection of these disciplines. Some of the significant issues it treats include the phenomenological definition of the phenomenon, the redefinition of the gift in terms not of economy but of givenness, the nature of saturated phenomena, and the question “Who comes after the subject?” Throughout his consideration of these issues, the author carefully notes their significance for the increasingly popular fields of religious studies and philosophy of religion. Being Given is therefore indispensable reading for anyone interested in the question of the relation between the phenomenological and the theological in Marion and emergent French phenomenology. (shrink)

The purpose of this paper is to reconstruct a Christian theology of “hospitality” through a critical reading of Jacques Derrida and Friedrich Nietzsche as well as through an in-depth biblical and theological reflection on the ethics of hospitality. Out of this reconstructive investigation, I propose a new Christian ethics of hospitality as a radical kind. As a new paradigm, this radical hospitality is distinguished from other types in that it is no longer conceived on the model of “gift”. The new (...) Christian ethics of hospitality is rather reconstructed on the model of “forgiveness” by critically appropriating the concept of “invisible debt” that lies between the hosting citizens and the migrants in the senses of “you owe us your presence” and “I owe you my security and success.” While the hospitality of the gift defines the relationship between the hosting citizens and the migrants as givers and givees, the new paradigm of hospitality identifies this relationship as between creditors and debtors. In this regard, a new Christian hospitality called for unto citizens of the hosting society is a radical kind that challenges them to transcend the creditor-debtor consciousness. (shrink)

At stake in his reading of the tale, to which the second half of this book is devoted, are the conditions of gift and forgiveness as essentially bound up with the movement of dissemination, a concept that Derrida has been working out for ...

In this paper, I examine Plato’s Euthyphro phenomenologically, reading the dialogue as manifesting the posture and activity of gratitude as an essential moment of piety. This phenomenon of gratitude appears directly through Euthyphro’s own remarks and indirectly through Socrates’s interaction with Euthyphro. Other recent commentators, notably Mark McPherran, David Parry, James Brouwer, and William Mann, have noted the importance of the Euthyphro as a dialogue that offers a great deal to the discussion of piety through the shape of the relationship (...) between Socrates and Euthyphro. In building my argument, I follow Parry’s examination of the notion of therapeia or care in order to mark out my own emphasis on charis or gratitude. And I note that, when gratitude is taken as an important phenomenon in the dialogue, what also appears to the reader is the pious possibility of authentic gift-giving and mutual recognition, something Brouwer, Mann, and McPherran have also noted indirectly. Finally, in addition to its synthesis of previous scholarship around a new theme, this paper applies to the dialogue the arguments of Melanie Klein’s “Envy and Gratitude,” Martin Heidegger’s lectures entitled What Is Called Thinking, and Jacques Derrida’s Given Time. (shrink)

If the dominant ethico-philosophical thinking of responsibility in the West is founded upon, or tied to a certain figure of death, it is because this ethical notion of responsibility is also a certain econo-onto-thanatology. Here the notion of the gift to the other is always already inscribed within a certain economic equivalence of value, or an economic determination of temporality as the geometric figure of the circle, or a certain economy of the experiences of abandonment and mourning, through which the (...) event-character of the gift, its excess and its infinite surplus is economised, reduced, repressed, or even annulled. Reading Jacques Derrida's deconstruction of this econo-onto-thanatology, and relating him to Schelling, Heidegger, Levinas and Kierkegaard, this article attempts to reveal this very complex relationship of the ethical notion of responsibility and the gift with death, in order to think anew – in the spirit of Derrida – a responsibility in relation to mourning and abandonment, and in relation to a death that does not figure in any figuration of self-figuration and self-presence, but – to speak with Maurice Blanchot – as interminable, incessant worklessness, as endless ruination and abandonment of itself. This impossible aporia of the notion of responsibility is itself a dis-figuring of death, which is also an aporia of an instant which escapes, in its event character, the geometric figure of time as circle. (shrink)

This paper begins with Barbara Johnson's examination of the erasure of sexual difference within the Yale school, and in particular her comments upon the work of Mary Shelley. Taking up hints in her statements about the relation between Mary Shelley's work and deconstruction, I suggest a reading of Mary Shelley's penultimate novel, Lodore, in relation to Derrida's Given Time. Lodore, which traditionally appeared a rather conservative novel to Mary Shelley's critics, has a number of parallels in its plot to the (...) logic of the gift as set out in Derrida's text. It also, however, allows us to begin to think through the related concept of the return, so crucial to both of the Shelley's thinking and writing. The essay analyses Lodore in relation to Derrida's account of the impossibility of the gift, in order, eventually, to move towards some comments about sexual difference, the novel, the gift and the return. (shrink)

Derrida analyzes Patocka's Heretical Essays on the History of Philosophy and develops and compares his ideas to the works of Heidegger, Levinas, and Kierkegaard.