"By linking Wittgenstein with Derrida, Staten suggests that the intellectual relevance of deconstruction is wider than the English-speaking public has...

Introduction This book is not a systematic commentary on the canonicaJ topoi of "Nietzsche's philosophy." Since my emphasis is on those parts or aspects of ...

Richard Rorty’s “Deconstruction and Circumvention” is a sobering reminder of how far we have to go before anything like a real dialogue between deconstruction and philosophy can take place in this country. Our literary critics ignore too much of what is specifically philosophical in philosophical texts; and our philosophers equally blind when they read literary language. Perhaps it is laughably undeconstructed to make the distinctions I had just made. But perpahs, too, it is not so easy to get beyond certain (...) oppositions as is beginning to be widely taken for granted. It is surprising to see Rorty encouraging such complacency, for Rorty himself generally thinks hard and to good purpose. He is a figure of unique distinction on our intellectual landscape, a bridge, perhaps, our only one, between deconstruction and the American philosophical establishment. But for that very reason it is sobering to see how this philosopher reads Jacques Derrida: very much as a philosopher reads. The overall result is ambiguous , but is it not finally to “encapsulate and circumvent” Derrida, leaving the native speech community immune to his critique? Let us see. Henry Staten is associate professor of English and adjunct professor of philosophy at the University of Utah. He is the author of Wittgenstein and Derrida and is currently working on a study of mourning and idealization in Western literature from Homer to D. H. Lawrence. (shrink)

Does Derrida's radicalization of the science-respecting Enlightenment tradition redefine it in such a way that the concept of nature is no longer relevant? But where is the tradition of Copernicus, Darwin, Nietzsche, Marx, without nature? Must there not be a post-deconstructive sense of nature that preserves the connection with the ethico-political project of naturalism? Derrida consistently defines deconstruction in naturalistic terms, specifically in terms of a commitment to the concept of materiality, and this commitment is essential to the ethico-political project (...) of naturalism, which is continually eroded by ‘weak’ naturalisms that at certain point collapse back into supernaturalism. A prime case in point in contemporary analytic philosophy is the attempt made by Nagel, Chalmers, and others to assign a special metaphysical status to ‘consciousness’ or ‘experience.’ When the project of deconstruction is seen as a form of naturalism, Daniel Dennett looms as an important potential ally against the forms of covert ‘spiritism’ represented by Nagel and Chalmers. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: The Intentions of Art Can Private Intentions Go Public? The Intention to Make a Poem Poems Are Made out of Words Blake's “London”.

This chapter contains sections titled: A Biological Basis Eliminating Vorstellung Explosive Quantum The Social Construction of Drives On Techne Self‐Shifting Practices Concluding Observations.

Heart of Darkness is the story of a quest for truth but a quest, we discover, that is veiled in ironies. But just how radical are these ironies? When Marlow tells us that Kurtz’s dying whisper enunciates a truth, does he give us a solid kernel around which we can build our further questioning, concerning, for example, whether Marlow preserves or betrays the truth he has been given?” This has been the assumption of most critics; regardless of the ingenuities by (...) which the varieties of interpretation has shown that Marlow in the end lies or does not lie, the axis of interpretation has almost always been defined by Kurtz’s presumed truth. Why should this be so? Why should Kurtz’s whisper be more significant than, say, the cry of the Intended with which the story culminates? But there are presuppositions in force here so strong that it seems senseless to ask this question. Classic presuppositions: the woman is dominated by emotion and desire, and her cry is at the other pole from the nonlibidinal utterance of truth. Marlow would agree with this assessment—for him, women are “out of touch with the truth” which you have to be “man enough” to face. So our truth-seeking criticism, which doubts much of what Marlow says, does not doubt the terms in which Marlow conceives of truth and its authority.Let us consider an example of the truth-seeking reading of Heart of Darkness, examining the ideology that sanctions this form of interpretation and showing how its presuppositions cooperate with Marlow’s. Our specimen will be a fairly recent PMLA article by Garrett Stewart called “Lying as Dying in Heart of Darkness.” Stewart’s “existential” reading invokes an economics of truth: Kurtz truthfully confronts death, facing and passing judgment upon the corruption of his being that emerges as fulfilled in his final moment; Marlow “lives through” Kurtz’s death and has the opportunity to preserve and transmit Kurtz’s “legacy of insight”; his lie, however, “kills the meaning of a death,” “squandering … Kurtz’s delegated revelation on a squeamish deceit.”1 1. Garrett Stewart, “Lying as Dying in Heart of Darkness,” PMLA 95 : 330, 329, 326; all further references to this essay, abbreviated “L,” will be included in the text. Henry Staten is associate professor of English and adjunct associate professor of philosophy at the University of Utah. He is the author of Wittgenstein and Derrida. The present essay is part of a book in progress on mourning and idealization in Western literature. (shrink)

How did molecules become signs? First, according to Deacon, there had to be an interpreter, a physical process capable of making use of some property of a molecule that offered a “semiotic affordance.” He proposes the model of an “autogenic virus,” the most primitive conceivable recursively self-maintaining kind of molecular system that could broach the boundary between physico-chemical process and “interpretive competence.” In this comment I work up to the question of how Deacon introduces concepts such as “representation” and “record” (...) into his account, to argue that the autogen can pass on its lineage without a genetic template. (shrink)