...then Derrida would be the Riddler. As it is Kant is clearly Superman, so Derrida might be some sort of Lex Luther type, he's certainly
more sultry than the
Riddler in Batman Forever. Similar hair though......hmm...
How to introduce Derrida? It seems a little bit silly to try and quote wikipedia at this juncture, as his project, the infamous DECONSTRUCTION was precisely an attack on systems as totality.
Before I try, let's just go back to Monsieur Descartes, with his famous 'catchphrase' :
'I think therefore I am.' In trying to doubt everything Descartes found that the only thing he could be absolutely sure of was his own thoughts: you can't doubt your own existence without...well...thinking, which undermines the whole exercise really. But for Descartes, you
can doubt your own body, physical reality might all be an illusion, like the Matrix or some video game brain in jar situation. (I nearly put brian-in-a-jar, but that would be something completely different).
So from Descartes comes one of the key discussions of Western Philosophy: how can we ever be sure that physical reality is not an illusion? Descartes does some fancy intellectual footwork appealing to God, which isn't very convincing. Berkeley says that things only really exist when we perceive them. Samuel Johnson kicks a stone and Hume just plays a game of bridge, just saying we should get on with the fact we can't be certain. Kant tries to join both together by appealing to two separate realms, saying that there is a structure to thought which presupposes certain things, that while they can't be verified they must be believed for our thoughts to make sense. Now that's the quickest summary of Kant's thought ever!
We can return to Derrida here. His point is that the way language works (developing Ferdinard Saussure's theory) precisely makes an appeal to a 'structure of thought' impossible. Language works
differentially: that is to say, we recognise sounds and symbols in contrast to other sounds and symbols, not by reference to things outside of language. There isn't a point where we can say 'ah look there's that thing beyond language that justifies language' because we're using language! As such '
language depends on
nothing, no fundamental ground of logic, science or society' (Holcombe: 2007), it just can't be determined absolutely. Any interpretation of a text is going to depend solely on the choice of some words over others, a suppression of some meanings in favour of others. Kant's interpretation of a structure of rationality would for Derrida be equally supressive.
Derrida thought this had huge ramifications for philosophical discourse, and to a certain extent this is true. On the grounds of this argument any concept claiming original authority, whether that be Heidegger's notion of authenticity, or concepts like absolute truth, meaning, identity and essence are simply stepping beyond their remit. Being cannot be said to be continually and statically 'present', a reference point for language that exists outside of it, because the structure of language disrupts this. Instead language is a constant flux of different interpretations, in which Being is neither present, nor absent. Of course this is impossible to draw, so instead I put him playing his Nintendo DS.
Lecture over, see you soon!
becca xo
p.s I cited John Holcombe's article from
http://www.textetc.com/theory/derrida.html
Check it out if you want to learn more about Derrida!
p.p.s Being & Tim 2012 diaries will be ready to order soon! Photos to follow this week!
p.p.p.s I'm very welcome to hear comments from those who might have more knowledge than me on Derrida's work. As Holcombe suggests, ''Derrida himself was a good deal more
astute and learned than his followers.'' (ibid.)
While I'm here, to the left are a few pictures of recent Being & Tim items: some stickers and some diaries. Still available to order from rasdyer@gmail.com or from Dave's comics....
Incidentally it's pretty hard to find an animal that hasn't already been attached to Schrodinger on the interwebs. I found Schrodinger's poodle, but let me know if you find anymore!
Part of the point of not posting while I was away was to catch up with some new cartoons. Unfortunately Ryanair's baggage policy (one lunchbox each) made it impossible to take my big sketchbook so I spent a lot of time just doodling really, plus being inspired by one of my fellow artists at the festivals, the lovely Emma. You can see her work at www.emmaekstam.com, it really is amazing. It's inspired me to start drawing things again, (I put a picture of my hands here for comedy value!), plus we talked about doing some illustrations together of Thus Spoke Zarasthustra. It's a pretty Romantic book (well I'd say it was satirical more than Romantic, but let's not split hairs right now) but the point is that all the references to dancing stars and tightrope walkers and hurdy gurdy songs would lend itself well to illustration. Y'know, spreading the word through imagery, like stained-glass windows! haha. Anyway, I'm going to try and put some more sketches up on here, to develop my style abit. But tell me if you just want more Being & Tim! (I don't really know the etiquette of blogs, can I change subjects a bit? Is that a betrayal?!)
oh dear. Not only did I miss our appointment last thursday, but once again I've left this late so I have had neither time to properly clean it up, nor to think of anything interesting to say, and as such, Being in particular looks a mess. Although in my defence, I was 'experimenting with a new style'....y'know, messy!
Anyway, the joke here is about confusing the relative with the absolute, but this is a silly philosophy pun, so instead I will talk about Apophatic Theology, in order to use long words and feel clever. Ready? Apophatic theology is a posh name for Negative Theology, that wot I mentioned in my last post, the idea that God is so awesome and infinite that language can't describe him, we just have to say what he's not like, in a gesture towards him. Sort of like saying, 'oh our language is so rubbish, but there is this thing beyond it that is not rubbish.' That's a direct from Julian of Norwich that is.
Also behold how I have put the three sections in three different parts! This is to build DRAMATIC TENSION, and not because it's too fiddly to put them altogether on photoshop...!!!! Let me know if you think it works, see you on thursday! becca xo
Hello there. Here's my post for this Monday, at a much more reasonable time than last week! I saw this video at the gym the other day. Apparently it's from 2008 but I hadn't heard it before although it is said to have 'taken the world by storm' or got 22 MILLION hits on youtube, which I guess is about the same thing. And yet, as so often happens in popular culture, the lyrics contain a ridiculous use of the word 'infinity.' (See the cartoon). Another example is in cult-classic movie Forbidden Planet, where the oh-so-super-intelligent scientist claims that the aliens managed to increase their energy supply: 'almost literally to the the power of infinity'. This latter example is made even more amusing by the use of the word 'almost' at the beginning!
so over <-----there is a sketch of The Cat in the hat, which i will alter for copyright purposes in my upcoming Being & Tim 'Schrodinger's Cat in the Hat'! For those of you who follow my Twitter account, this is the quantum mechanics i've been attempting to get my head around! And it's trying to get it to rhyme which is the real kicker...still, keep you eyes on this page, I reckon it'll be ready sooooonish. Go here if you wish to prepare yourself! 
And here ----> is another cartoon sketch of the two characters I hope you are familiar with now, Data Entry Pig and Becca Bumface. (They're going to get their own blog soon, called 'Friends on Benefits', one of those ''social satires'' of the world of work and the benefit system. Ho ho) Here Becca Bumface is attempting to simplify Nietzsche's notion of the Apollonian/Dionysiac. (That's the Birth Of Tragedy in front of her there...!) You can read more about this here, and make your own decision if Art Garfunkel really does represent the orgiastic and ecstatic elements of the Dionysian. So, just another sketch really, for my own amusement...and to mock my friend who said it...!
When my dad was about the age he is in this picture, he did a test where he was asked to fill in the sentence 'G___ M___ think alike'. As you might have guessed, he thought that the answer was grey mice, which I've always thought really cute, and have finally got round to illustrating. He probably didn't imagine that they were talking about Derrida, but I thought it was funnier that way...Oh, and I'm also working on some ideas for new non-philosophical comics, so if you like inappropriate humour about illness and/or social satire featuring pigs in ruffs, then stay tuned! Happy Secular Chocolate-Scoffing Weekend! beccaxo
