Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Reculer pour mieux voir

Reculer pour mieux voir 192 and the language of time; and any philosophical engagement with that problem and language finds itself implicated and at issue in deconstruction's unsettling of the concept of time, its exploration of the originary differentiating constitutive of any conceptuality at all. If Wood's underlying thematic encourages us to read that closing and summarizing question, cited in the passage above, as rhetorical, if the "viens" thus beckons towards a future for philosophy (phenomenology) and for deconstruction, for philosophy with deconstruction, a future for all sorts of futures but also and always-and somehow especially-for this one, for the one protective of all the others, that question can also be read literally. (The final separated sentence seems to hint at such a response, the questions left "for another time.") The underly- ing thesis cannot entirely secure that "viens" and the risk of sterility is accordingly not only methodological. At risk is even the most generous of gestures, statements concerning the most plural of pluralities and the smallest of "petits ricits". The Other (this singular future) is also ruination, is thus the ruin of phenomenology. And it comes, and never stops coming. Paul Davies DePaul University REVIEW ARTICLES Reculer pour mieux voir http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Research in Phenomenology Brill

Reculer pour mieux voir

Pellauer, David
Research in Phenomenology , Volume 21 (1): 192 – Jan 1, 1991
Download PDF
6 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/reculer-pour-mieux-voir-6dgVWlUTsL

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 1991 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0085-5553
eISSN
1569-1640
DOI
10.1163/156916491X00143
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

192 and the language of time; and any philosophical engagement with that problem and language finds itself implicated and at issue in deconstruction's unsettling of the concept of time, its exploration of the originary differentiating constitutive of any conceptuality at all. If Wood's underlying thematic encourages us to read that closing and summarizing question, cited in the passage above, as rhetorical, if the "viens" thus beckons towards a future for philosophy (phenomenology) and for deconstruction, for philosophy with deconstruction, a future for all sorts of futures but also and always-and somehow especially-for this one, for the one protective of all the others, that question can also be read literally. (The final separated sentence seems to hint at such a response, the questions left "for another time.") The underly- ing thesis cannot entirely secure that "viens" and the risk of sterility is accordingly not only methodological. At risk is even the most generous of gestures, statements concerning the most plural of pluralities and the smallest of "petits ricits". The Other (this singular future) is also ruination, is thus the ruin of phenomenology. And it comes, and never stops coming. Paul Davies DePaul University REVIEW ARTICLES Reculer pour mieux voir

Journal

Research in Phenomenology – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 1991

There are no references for this article.