Derrida, Deconstruction, and the University

Educational Theory, 2009

In this essay, Steven Burik discusses Jacques Derrida's position with regard to the place of education in philosophy within the university system, and then relates these thoughts to comparative philosophy. Philosophers find themselves constantly having to defend philosophy and the importance of teaching philosophy against pressure from the powers that be. Burik contends that the argument Derrida set forth to ''protect'' philosophy entails a double bind: Derrida emphasized the value and importance of philosophical thinking while at the same time criticizing the limits of philosophy, both self-mandated and externally imposed. Derrida's defense of philosophy was anything but a protection of the status quo, according to Burik. Derrida ultimately argued that the teaching of philosophy and philosophy itself should be inherently open to new developments. Burik relates Derrida's defense of philosophy and attack on mainstream philosophy to comparative philosophy, demonstrating that both argue for an expansion of thinking beyond the narrow Western confines of philosophy as ''pure'' reason or rationality by showing how alterity always inserts itself, and that both seek to give this alterity a valid place in educational systems.

Edinburgh University Press eBooks, 2021

This chapter, in exploring the implications of Derrida's admission of the example of the Clipper chip into the book version of Politics of Friendship, desacralises the notion of khora, as 'the place of possible substitution', and as 'third genus' between the intelligible and the sensible.2 This opens up a 'spectrology' of the in-between in which the importance of design education, design practices and designed entities emerges, as media for formal and informal public education, by extension from Derrida's emphasis on the role of literature and the humanities in the university.3 In doing so, it acknowledges Derrida's emphasis on secrecy or confidentiality for his conception of the relation between the educational and the political. For Derrida, reflection upon the Kantian ethics and politics of friendship should organise itself around the concept of secrecy (PF, 257).4 The secret is 'that which one thinks [.. .] must remain secret because an engagement has been entered upon and a promise made in certain non-natural conditions' (259).

Philosophy Today, 2017

In this essay I examine Derrida's attempts to transform how philosophy is conceived, specifically as this occurs in his writings on education. In these writings Derrida challenges two understandings of philosophy-in his interventions into debates on lycée education he targets philosophy in France, while in texts related to the founding of the Collège International de Philosophie at stake is philosophy understood as a broader European institution. I argue that in each case key in Derrida's challenge is his rethinking of philosophy's relation to other disciplines, and I suggest that this rethinking can aid us in our own attempts to transform education in philosophy.

Derrida Today, 2021

In this article, I consider the role of institutions in Jacques Derrida's political engagement. In spite of Derrida's significant involvement with political causes throughout his life, his engagements have received little sustained attention, and this is particularly true of his work with institutions. I turn to two such cases, the Collège international de philosophie and the Parlement international des écrivains and argue that these represent an alternative mode of institutionalisation. These institutions seek to destabilise other institutions as well as themselves. Looking closely at the institutions that Derrida founded, we see three common characteristics emerge. These institutions are anti-hegemonic, self-reflexive and international. I then connect these to Derrida's thought, offering a reading of the undecidable, which brings forth the importance of conventions in the decision. Finally, I demonstrate that the three shared characteristics of Derrida's institutio...

M. Derrida preferred not to contribute to our symposium by writing an article, but asked if we could send him some questions to which he could reply. The questions naturally reflect the themes that were prominent in the recent debate.

A Companion to Derrida, 2014

PMLA, 2005

Educational Philosophy and Theory, 2019

Higher education has not been spared from the effects of the disruptive aspects of technology. MOOCs, teach bots, virtual learning platforms, and Wikipedia are among technics marking a digital transformation of knowledge. The question of the university, the foundation of its authority and purpose is more than timely; it is urgent to any future philosophy of higher education. Will the university survive in the future and if so, for what purpose? We examine two philosophers, Jacques Derrida and Bernard Stiegler, who take on this challenge. Derrida, writing at 'the scene of teaching', proposes new humanities for a university 'without condition', one with increasing autonomy to democratize it further. Stiegler takes issue with him on the conditions of the university of the future. Stiegler offers not an 'anti-Derridian discourse' but a 'deconstruction of a deconstruction' of Derrida. Stiegler's critique of Derrida on the role of the professoriate and the university of the future expand the fissure between them. In this article, we argue that Stiegler's reading of Derrida points to the university not as an anachronistic way of knowing displaced by the digital revolution but as vital to a politics of the spirit in a democratic future.

Philosophy & Society (Filozofija i drustvo), 2024

In this article, I argue that literature represents a privileged modality for thinking institutionality in Derrida's work and, moreover, that literature represents a model for institutions. The first section presents Derrida's understanding of literature as anti-essentialist and a mode of experience which resists the transcendence of identity. In the second section, I propose that literature attends to its own fragility, lacking any definite foundation or external referent. I then consider the political implications of this position, demonstrating that literature not only encourages us to attend to its own fragile foundations, but also the foundations of sociopolitical institutions in general. It achieves this attention through its specific relationship to performative language. In the fourth section, I argue that literature reveals institutions as an effect of différance; rather than understanding différance as an infinite delay, institutions emerge in the process of différance. Literature underscores the inescapability of institutions. Our aim, as Derrida stresses, should not be to do away with institutions, but to form a new relation to institutions. I conclude by outlining some of these implications for literature as an institution which can serve as a model for the new relation to institutionality that Derrida valorises.

Textual Practice, 2018