He isn't answering the question of "Being" but rather explaining how he would approach the question. This is exactly what I needed. It's so simple, but our brains go for the most complex way to address our existential angst and get lost in the thought. Thank you, Mr. Derrida.
This is excellent. I love the way Derrida thinks. He has the unique ability to really get at that essential thing. The great thing is: it is accessible to anybody.
Fuck yeah, that's awesome, thanks (a dozen years later... yow). That's an outtake? Jesus, that's the most I've ever felt like I understood what my man is up to. Thanks again to the past you that is something other than the modified present you. ;)
Poor Derrida, he must've been an overthinker who can't sleep, sometimes it's more efficient to understand and see the truth when you just believe without questioning too much. Reality is of a major question itself rather than the existence or being, the best thing to do is just to be a believer.
Derrida has no ontological understanding of Being becuase Derrida is without Dasein as we witness 'here' with Derrida not being 'there'. Derrida has no presence of the present unable to be present unable to come to presence: Being is not 'interpreted' as Presence: Being is Presenve.
@Grimoire I know very little French, but from what I think you said... You have to understand what he is trying to explain... It is very hard to do by trying to add it all up together.
@Grimoire I think so. His whole point is really in understanding just how different something can be if framed/phrased in a certain way. It makes perfect sense to me, but it is difficult to put into words, which is why so many hate Derrida lmao
You can only understand Derrida if you understand and grasp Hieddeger. You can only truly understand Deleuze or Baudrillard if you understand Nietzche. Also Marshall Mcluhan in some ways.
He isn't answering the question of "Being" but rather explaining how he would approach the question. This is exactly what I needed. It's so simple, but our brains go for the most complex way to address our existential angst and get lost in the thought. Thank you, Mr. Derrida.
this video shows how deeply he is influenced by Levinas, the trace, the violence of language (the said) and so on, are themes of Levinas's philosophy
exactly what I was thinking!
Thinker way ahead of his time 🙏
This is excellent. I love the way Derrida thinks. He has the unique ability to really get at that essential thing. The great thing is: it is accessible to anybody.
Quite the contrary -- His whole point is that we can never get at "the essential thing;" it is accessible to no-one.
not sure whether to differ, or to defer. (with regard to the above comments)
POWERFUL
Fuck yeah, that's awesome, thanks (a dozen years later... yow). That's an outtake? Jesus, that's the most I've ever felt like I understood what my man is up to. Thanks again to the past you that is something other than the modified present you. ;)
"Blame everything on Plato and the rest of get away with the whole she-bang." (No doubt)
"So then, his ideas are correct as pre-conception, but untrue as examined, conceived of, or iterated by voice." (Irony)
"Why? Your ideas, dear Sir." (Irony)
This sums up the whole Derrida thing.
Read The question concerning technology and there you have Derrida.
"Who's ideas?" (Plato)
baba Derrida! thoda tham jaao 🥲
L'effect
c'est moi
Poor Derrida, he must've been an overthinker who can't sleep, sometimes it's more efficient to understand and see the truth when you just believe without questioning too much.
Reality is of a major question itself rather than the existence or being, the best thing to do is just to be a believer.
?
You're the one we feel sorry for... so scared of thinking you're worried you would lose sleep 😅
Derrida has no ontological understanding of Being becuase Derrida is without Dasein as we witness 'here' with Derrida not being 'there'. Derrida has no presence of the present unable to be present unable to come to presence: Being is not 'interpreted' as Presence: Being is Presenve.
every video i watch of derrida he has nothing intresting or original to say.
That's because you don't get it.
@Grimoire I know very little French, but from what I think you said... You have to understand what he is trying to explain... It is very hard to do by trying to add it all up together.
@Grimoire I think the point is thought itself.
@Grimoire I think so. His whole point is really in understanding just how different something can be if framed/phrased in a certain way. It makes perfect sense to me, but it is difficult to put into words, which is why so many hate Derrida lmao
You can only understand Derrida if you understand and grasp Hieddeger. You can only truly understand Deleuze or Baudrillard if you understand Nietzche. Also Marshall Mcluhan in some ways.