Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Searle Reply To Derrida

    Uploaded by

    derriderer

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Searle Reply To Derrida

    Uploaded by

    derriderer
    8 views7 pages

    Original Title

    Searle Reply to Derrida

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    8 views7 pages

    Searle Reply To Derrida

    Uploaded by

    derriderer

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 7
    Cal 808.8 C508 v.3 DAVIDSON DeteRer uascann Near Er ae TM: 7 LenderStrings NAD NKMRUK MEM AMU ll l l| Borrower: NOD Pato Kg, Wii Dat De aro, Di tines ay ohio BUT oxy Dum c ma Tile: Glyph Sue: Msrovng. ARIEL ADDRESS: 12.1618 Thao yout Nate Artie Relating the Dilerens A Repl to Derida vy v Date: 197 Popes: 198 IP Address: 1SL3.116.118 AANA Email Address: illrequests @duke.edu Stuf Ena 1LLREQUESTS@DUKEEDU Shea Be Fer OG 964 Sign: De ey arson hye oe BOX NOURI NE REITERATING THE DIFFERENCES: A REPLY TO DERRIDA’ John R, Searle ‘Tr wou os a mistoke, | think, to regard Derrida’s discussion of Austin aa conn nineen to pronent philosophical eto, This fs not so much because Derida has filed to discuss ‘the centeal theses in ‘Austin’s theory of language, but rather because he has misunderstood and misstated Austin's postion at several crucial points, as T shall at- tmp show, and hus the conirotation never quite teks place ‘His paper divides neturally into two parts: Tn the first part he diseases wing ard its lation to content and communication, In the secon, pling varios ofthe conclusions ofthe fast pat he dsusses some features of Austin’s theory of speech acts. He concludes with a disso ofthe ole of gates, In my reply J wll not temp dea withl or even very many ofthe pins he elses, but wil exe trate on thse tht ee to eto the most important and especily on thse whe I csage wth hs condos [chal sy at the outset tha [i oo dhs agony clear edits pss that may hove antergote him as profoundly a6 Taine be has miter ‘preted Austin Copyright @ 1977 by John B. Serle 19 AtReply to Decide 1 WRITING, PEEMARUNCE, AND TTERABILITY In he Sct parte mounts an aac on the ie of ng asthe cxmmusicton intended metning. The uence wig can and must beable to function inthe aia absence of the sender, tbe reccer, andthe context of produto camo ete ommunia- ton ofthe endeys mening to the eevr Shee my wring cn on tinue to motion after and ll my intended readers ae dead and sine the context of the witng may be total fegotn or unknown, th toviaoa of commanicaton ot the omnia ofcnsuseses ct resents nari i the transport ofthe intended meaning (oui dre) of teeth. My communtatn mst be peatatl—terte—n he sbstute absence ofthe receiver or of any empl determinable colt of osx” (pp. 179-8), He then extents sension tothe ‘las ane of ting bout which he argues that eileen feats tht the casa concept atts to witng are general Inde, they are "ad ok only fr al odes of ‘gn’ an for al lnguaes in gener but rmoecer, bejond seri inguisti communion forthe ene eld of ‘what lwophy would cal expe." (p18). This cousin i then in turn used o suppor genera tack onthe dea of omni cation a th communication of intended meanings. is cui stat he tte eset tures inte clas conception of wong ~Lat wt ing emai (et) afer, ht thas“ fre dr fae? ih its contest of prtuctio, ad tat tha an “sane” wich consis the wen sign—are tobe fund in all lnguage ecsuse othe itera of gus cee’ ely looms nen bh of thee arguments, nd wi have mre tosy cotta In rer to get at whats wrong wit hse erganent ts hein by asking iat sit exalythatdshngulhes ten from spoken an uoge, I it Serb, che repeat of the Inguite bres Cleay not. As Dera fs aware, any Hnguistc cement woten or spoken indeed an rlegovened element in any ste of repeats tim at ll mute repeat, ober he les wel Rae oo Sone cf apa, ‘To say tis fst o say that ee eelan’s penton istnetion must apply geeraly to all he rulegermed elanen's Tanguge in ne tht eles can be apd one commence of the phenomena speed bythe es. Wot this etre of aaty thee mld not be the pus of prodiag an infinite numberof sentences wth ait st of elements; ad ths, as lsophess since roger, one ote eal eres oy lan Tsitesency, the absence ofthe reever fom the sender? gin, 200 John R, Searle cei not, Wig mes it posse to communicate wth an bet ete bt sn nee for th ene ob abet, Wen maar nn et i tb presente of the tle, a fo example, Sen I conpse shopping It for myself or pas nes to my com pon nga cst o etre. To abe it would be posible to spely many features which ings wing om spoken tetas for eam, tng is ‘al and eng uaa for the pps ofthis seston the ost imran! singing fate i the (eat) permanence of the ween tnt over the pen rd rex i an er tape recendings sand recor lying maces, the primary dee for preserving ter anes ben (or pind) word, This late permanence ot allows froth the absence of the receiver end, equally important, the torumulaon of Inge asin an etended text. can read an au- thats words after he hes ce, anderen wile he is alive he himself cannot el me the entre contents of al is books, ely hs boks can do that, No the fis confusion hat Deda makes, and tis important for the argument tat flows, is that e onus Seely with the pemnene ofthe fest He thinks teres that J can read dead othr shea thi works ae repeatable oe ierable, Wel, na dvb th fac tat ferent copes are mae of th books makes i @ lot ender, bt be phenomenon ofthe survival ofthe text not these os the penomenonof repeatability: the petsken dstcton is Ia independent ofthe fc ofthe permanence of certain takes. One and the saa et (token) can be red by many diferent readers lng after the death af the autor, andi is his phenomenon ofthe permanence oft tet bat makes psi to seperate the uerace rom ts ii, and singues the ten from the spoken word ‘Thisconfuson of peranene with teri esa the hear of his angen for asiatng fetes ofthe wlten tet with features of sgoken words. He wats, Ths stot pssiity of being weaned from th tefrent oro the sige (hence fom eommunicaton and from is omteat) seems to me to make every matk, including those chan oa, epee in general; whic to sy, 8 we have sen, the nonpresentreeider [ester ofa dlftrentel mar ent of from ‘ts pave produto ogi” (9.183), Butter ian embigty inthis argument that fatal tits valde fy Th way in wc a wten tet i weaned from its oii sgt

    You might also like