Badiou versus Derrida: Truth, sets, and sophistry

Philosophical Forum 43 (1):51-64 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX


This article explores the question of truth in the work of Jacques Derrida and Alain Badiou. Specifically, it investigates Badiou’s claim that deconstruction is a form of sophistry. Badiou positions himself against Derrida in preference for a philosophy committed to Truth, Being and the event. The sophist, in contrast to the philosopher, denies the existence of truths and the category of truth. Despite this hostility, Badiou argues that the two must coexist. Badiou also explores the relationship between existence and inexistence insofar as différence represents what Badiou labels the passion of Inexistance. The article concludes with how the two philosophers envision the place of truth in the future of philosophy: the flash of an event which punctures a hole in knowledge (Badiou) or the necessity of embracing the deconstructive nature of truth, language and knowledge (Derrida).



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 77,737

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

100 (#128,722)

6 months
15 (#76,907)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Dr David Fiorovanti
University of Melbourne (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references