IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
> Perhaps even Anders and Ian W will find something of interest here? Probably not! Maybe if you can translate it into plain english then I can have an opinion. Are you sure this isn't another Sokal parody? -- to me it reads like one. "Derrida talks about the way in which the anticipated return of the ghost may be mobilized on behalf of a deconstruction of all historicisms that are grounded in a rigid sense of chronology." -- is it just me, or isn't this just a load of old cobblers? Before I get accused of philistinism: I understand the need for technical language and the invention of new concepts. But authors who genuinely wish to communicate to as many people as possible will try to clearly define those new concepts. My limited reading of Derrida is restricted to "Of Grammatology", and I felt there was no attempt to communicate, only obsfucate. Why has this postmodern style of writing become popular in some quarters? -Ian.
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, (continued)
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Jerry Levy Fri 28 Oct 2005, 13:03 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Rakesh Bhandari Fri 28 Oct 2005, 20:16 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Jerry Levy Sat 29 Oct 2005, 13:59 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Rakesh Bhandari Mon 31 Oct 2005, 04:49 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Ian Wright Fri 28 Oct 2005, 17:03 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Allin Cottrell Sat 29 Oct 2005, 00:29 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Rakesh Bhandari Sat 29 Oct 2005, 00:47 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Allin Cottrell Sat 29 Oct 2005, 02:33 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Derrida's ghosts, Michael Perelman Sat 29 Oct 2005, 02:48 GMT