Derrida is famous for producing such critical readings, which have come to be

called "deconstructions." His readings go beyond the mere accuracy of "doubling

Commentary" ("this indispensable guardrail has always only protected, it has never
opened, a reading"), but they nevertheless remain "intrinsic" to the text. Instead of
rushing to expound the text's presumed content, meaning, or referent, they try to
remain at the point and within the logic that renders the leap to an outside so
tempting. Instead of choosing between incompatible or contradictory readings, Der
attempts to understand the double binds and tensions that are articulated in the text.
Rousseau, standing between the Enlightenment and Romanticism, is a figure
writings are symptomatic of the fissures in the logocentric system that he both
reproduces and resists. In order to see a relationship in a particular language
between patterns one commands and patterns one does not command, Derrida
worked within the space between the signified (what is meant) and the signifier
(the vehicle for conveying that meaning). The noncoincicdence of the two sides of
the sign can never be overcome: indeed, we detect a signified when a signifier
doesn't quite coincide with it. The signifier, for Derrida, thus functions as a "trace"
that gives the impression that a signified was prior to it, even though the only
evidence for that signified is the trace itself. The Swiss linguist FERDINAND DE
SAUSSURE, who split the sign into signifier and signified, revolutionized the
understanding of language by seeing it as a system (internally as well as externally
articulated) and not as a nomenclature (a simple aggregation of names). According
to Saussure, language does not arise cumulatively from either things or ideas but
instead produces things or ideas out of a structure of differences Language is a
system of differences," he says in Course in General Linguistics (1916), "without
positive terms." Derrida takes this concept of difference from Saussure and adds to
it the dimension of temporality that Saussure's static (or synchronic) structure does
not allow. In doing so, Derrida uncovers a significant contradiction in Saussure:
although Saussure thinks he can eliminate writing as secondary and keep speech as
essential, he treats language as fixed in time and thus as if it were a dead language-
a language that we can only know in writing. To mark the combination of such
synchronic and diachronic differences, Derrida juxtaposes two grammatical
extensions of the verb différer (translated into English by two different verbs, "to
differ" and "to defer"): différence, a noun that implies syn- chronic comparison,
and différance, a noun of identical pronunciation that invokes a process-the
temporal process of deferring or postponing. 'The structure of language in real
1|Page
time-always changing, and always changing in more than one way-involves both
of these senses. But, ironically, a difference (between "e" and "a") meant to be
perceived only in writing has become, in English, recognizable in speech:
"Derridean différance" (pronounced with the French nasal found in "Vive la
différence!") does not escape the privileging of voice that it was designed to
counteract. Derrida makes the counterintuitive claim that writing is more
fundamental than speech. This has often been misunderstood or taken literally. It is
as though Derrida is not aware of the fact that babies learn to speak before they
learn to write, or that some societies have oral cultures on which writing (Western
and imperialistic) has been imposed. Indeed, critics say, hasn't the existence of a
written tradition been used to demonstrate Western culture's superiority, and hasn't
orality been dismissed as primitive? Why does Derrida say that "Western
metaphysics" privileges speech Logos-and represses writing? lsn't the case just the
opposite? Yes and no. Western culture has always been able to have it both ways;
starting with PLATo, who condemned writing in writing in his Phaedrus (ca. 370
B.C.E.;See above). Our selection from Dissemination-excerpts from "Plato's
Pharmacy-offerS an analysis of that phenomenon. In his writing, Plato idealized
speech as the living emanation of the word, as if it erased the gap between signifier
and signified. 'Ins idealization of the logos (speech, presence, truth, reason)
requires that it belong no to any actual language but only to God. And,
paradoxically, such an idea of speech 1 claimed only in writing-a writing that
pretends it doesn't exist, or is simply a tool that effaces itself in the final moment of
truth. This pretence is what Derrida calls "the repression of writing."

Please elucidate free play, différer, différence, différance, dissemination, relation

of logic, reception, platonism & effect of generalization in above passage

Free play refers to the idea that language is not fixed or stable, but rather consists
of a system of differences that are constantly in flux. This concept is central to
Derrida's philosophy and is related to his ideas about différance.

Différer is a French verb that can be translated to "to differ" or "to defer." In
Derrida's philosophy, différer refers to the inherent difference between the signifier

2|Page
and the signified in language. This difference can never be fully resolved, as the
signifier always falls short of conveying the full meaning of the signified.

Différence is a noun that refers to synchronic or static differences, such as

differences between two things in the present moment.

Différance, on the other hand, is a noun of identical pronunciation that invokes a

process of deferring or postponing, and refers to the temporal and diachronic
differences that arise in language over time.

Dissemination refers to the process by which ideas and meanings are spread
throughout a culture or society. In Derrida's philosophy, dissemination is related to
the idea of différance, as it involves the constant deferral and postponement of
meaning as it is transmitted and translated across different contexts.

The relation of logic in this passage refers to the way in which Derrida's
philosophy critiques traditional Western notions of logic, which are based on
binary oppositions and fixed categories. Instead, Derrida emphasizes the fluidity
and indeterminacy of meaning in language.

Reception refers to the way in which a text or idea is received by its audience or
readership. In Derrida's philosophy, reception is related to the process of
dissemination, as it involves the way in which meanings and interpretations are
produced and reproduced in different contexts.

Platonism refers to the philosophical tradition that is based on the ideas of Plato. In
Derrida's philosophy, Platonism is criticized for its privileging of speech over
writing, which he sees as a manifestation of the logocentric system that he seeks to
deconstruct.

The effect of generalization in this passage refers to the way in which certain ideas
or concepts are generalized or universalized across different contexts or cultures.
Derrida critiques this tendency to generalize, as he sees it as a way of imposing
fixed categories and structures onto language and culture that ignore the inherent
fluidity and complexity of meaning.

3|Page
In Phaedrus, Plato repeats an ancient story of the origin and judgment of writing.
The inventor of writing, Theuth, presents it to King Thamus of Egypt as a remedy
for forgetfulness. The king rejects his invention on the grounds that it will induce
forgetfulness, not remedy the condition. The word that they use for writing,
pharmakon (drug), means "remedy" as well as "poison." Though translators of
Plato have chosen one rendering or the other, according to the context, the word
contains both meanings; its translations thus dismember it into a subsequent
either/or structure of Plato, in the nature of "Platonism," and indeed in the history
of philosophy itself. Derrida shows how the effort to fit everything into binary
oppositions (speech and writing , good and bad, true and false, philosophy and
literature, etc.) depends on a distinguishability that does not exist within the word
pharmakon. The translations suggest that it names one side or the other of an
existing polarity, but the word is the medium and not a result of the split into
either/or. A logic prior to that split, however, is almost impossible to think. It risks
seeming like sophistry-and after Plato, the distinction between philosophy and
sophistry becomes the either/or split on which all the others (and philosophy itself)
depend. The distinction Plato makes between sophistry and philosophy is
philosophy, argues Derrida; philosophy is not merely one counterbalancing term
(as Plato, but perhaps not Plato's text, seems to believe). Derrida reads Plato's
Phaedrus as outlining the paradoxical logic of that claim. In focusing on words-
supplément in Rousseau, pharmakon in Plato (even the word déconstruction was
originally chosen to translate Heidegger's Destruktion, bringing out the sense of
"taking apart" rather than "blowing up")-Derrida does not fashion a theoretical
metalanguage of concepts designed to support discriminations and generalizations.
Each word is found in a text, not made to account for it or for other texts. Such
terms are useful because they enable a rereading of the text in which they occur.
Derrida is at pains not to separate out a set of terms and define them as theory,"
aiming instead to read each new text and find its "exorbitant' terms. What these
"undecidables" (as Derrida sometimes calls them) have in common is their
displacement of what is normally taken for granted as the ground rules for a
reading.

Please elucidate free play, différer, différence, différance, dissemination, relation

of logic, reception, platonism & effect of generalization in above passage

4|Page
Free play is a concept used by Derrida to describe the inherent instability and
indeterminacy in language and meaning. It refers to the way in which meaning is
not fixed, but is constantly shifting and subject to multiple interpretations.

Différer is a term used by Derrida to describe the process of deferral or delay that
is inherent in language. It refers to the way in which meaning is never fully present
or fixed, but is always deferred to another moment in time or another signifier.

Différence refers to the difference or distinction between two things. In Derrida's

work, it is used to describe the way in which meaning is constructed through a play
of differences and distinctions between signifiers.

Différance is a term coined by Derrida to describe the interplay between différer

and différence. It refers to the way in which meaning is constructed through the
deferral of signification and the play of differences between signifiers.

Dissemination refers to the way in which meaning is spread or disseminated

through language and communication. It suggests that meaning is not fixed or
contained within a single signifier, but is instead dispersed and disseminated across
a network of signifiers.

The relation of logic refers to the way in which Derrida's work challenges
traditional notions of logical thinking and binary oppositions. Derrida argues that
language is inherently unstable and that the meaning of words is always subject to
multiple interpretations and readings.

Reception refers to the way in which a text is read and interpreted by its audience.
Derrida's work emphasizes the importance of recognizing the role of the reader in
the construction of meaning.

Platonism refers to the philosophical tradition that is based on the ideas of Plato.
Derrida's work challenges the binary oppositions and hierarchical thinking that are
characteristic of Platonism.

The effect of generalization in the passage is that it can lead to the creation of fixed
and stable categories and concepts, which Derrida argues are problematic because
they do not adequately account for the inherent instability and indeterminacy of
language and meaning. Instead, Derrida emphasizes the importance of recognizing

5|Page
the contingency and complexity of meaning and the need for ongoing
interpretation and re-interpretation.

In that sense, the logics they make visible and functional are generalizible-but they
are not logics, if logic is understood as something separable from the text and
generalizable apart from it. They are threads in it. Derrida is most successful at
making the work of language perceptible at all times within processes of thinking,
reading, and writing when he departs from the transparency readers expect-when
he draws criticism for the stylistic obscurity he has Worked so hard to achieve. In
his delays, wordplays, digressions, etymologies, grammatical and syntactical
gymnastics, and apparent changes of subject, Derrida doesn't so much transgress
rules as stretch them beyond the point where other writers would stop. Some of his
sentences are indeed "unspeakable," refusing to correspond to the rhythm of
breath, the sounds of emphasis that shape writing as a silent version of what could
be spoken out loud. But more than resisting the clarity that every reader, in order to
read at all, necessarily continues to seek, Derrida's writings analyze, make visible,
and denaturalize the assumptions that have gone into the formation of what counts
as clarity in the first place.

Please elucidate free play, différer, différence, différance, dissemination, relation

of logic, reception, platonism & effect of generalization in above passage

Free play refers to the idea that language is not a fixed system of signs with
predetermined meanings, but rather an open-ended and constantly evolving system
of signifiers that are inherently unstable and subject to multiple interpretations.

Différer, différence, and différance are all related to the concept of difference.
Différer refers to the act of deferring or postponing something, while différence
refers to the quality or state of being different. Différance, on the other hand, is a
term coined by Derrida to describe the fundamental instability of meaning that
arises from the interplay between différer and différence.

Dissemination refers to the process by which meaning is spread or circulated

through language, culture, and society. In Derrida's view, dissemination is an

6|Page
inevitable and necessary aspect of language, but it also contributes to the inherent
instability of meaning.

The relation of logic is the connection between Derrida's ideas and the study of
logic. Derrida is critical of traditional forms of logic, which he sees as based on
binary oppositions and fixed meanings. Instead, he argues that logic should be seen
as a dynamic and constantly evolving process of meaning-making.

Reception refers to the way in which Derrida's ideas have been received and
interpreted by others. Derrida's work has been controversial and has generated a
wide range of responses, from enthusiastic embrace to outright rejection.

Platonism refers to the philosophical tradition that traces its roots back to the ideas
of Plato. Derrida is critical of Platonism, particularly its emphasis on fixed
meanings and binary oppositions.

The effect of generalization is the tendency to reduce complex and nuanced ideas
to simple, generalized concepts. Derrida is critical of this tendency, arguing that it
ignores the inherent instability of meaning and reduces language to a static and
unchanging system.

7|Page