Wow, this guy stinks at explication. It's pretty much value judgements from start to stop with nothing about the relationship of deconstruction to previous forms of literary theory, which is precisely what one would expect to be important whenever an author claims to have created a theoretical paradigm.
Contrary to what you suggest, structuralist theorists didn't buy into the 'intentional fallacy', nor is Derrida known for articulating/identifying the intentional fallacy-- You'd want to go to the American New Critics (Cleanth Brooks, esp, as he coins the term) and Roland Barthes ('The Death of the Author'). Though it's fair to say that Derrida had no interest in uncovering authorial intent, and that he considered such a project impossible and pointless, to boot.
Derrida would be amused but not impressed. Deconstruction is the philosopher's way of saying that literature is to blame for the ambiguities and failures in his methods, not his search for being. Derrida was not playing games. So, who's to blame? Philosophers or poets? Derrida, you see, corrected Heidegger's deathbed regression toward poetry. BTW, he hated Hollywood and this sort of tripe.
@asinkingship [Derrida feared that people would reduce his philosophy or misinterpret his words...]
How can one misinterpret his work when he himself advocated the position that the meaning of a text is not only divorced from but also continues on without its author? Deconstructionists, indeed, often seem perfectly willing to use the power of their position, often as academic professionals, to punish people who disagree. Good thing meaning and truth are axiomatically independent, eh?
i don't have to make a mark to make it in philosophy whose the idiot most philosophers were street walking geniuses have you ever read a philosophy book ..seriously your an idiot
@adrianeaglrck One of the biggest idiots I know graduated from college with a bachelors in philosophy. You'll have to make a mark to make anything out of it which I predict you'll never do.
here my mark...wait for it...wait for....yes i'm doing now! yes its a big pile of shit i just took all over your comments thats enough to get me a honorary degree
we need more of those!!!
mousseva 1 week ago in playlist Uploaded videos
This is brilliant!
lolzroflz 1 month ago
Wow, this guy stinks at explication. It's pretty much value judgements from start to stop with nothing about the relationship of deconstruction to previous forms of literary theory, which is precisely what one would expect to be important whenever an author claims to have created a theoretical paradigm.
featheon 1 month ago
Comment removed
ciberlucia 1 month ago
wtf did i just watch??????????
tiiimtiiimtiiim 1 month ago
would prefer if it was 2 min. it's so quick I can barely hear
dovesandclouds 2 months ago
you have totally misunderstood structuralism - you conflate it with historicism. Structuralism advocated the 'death of the author'. Read Barthes.
redux0 4 months ago 4
well i think derrida contributed something worth saying.
gen6k 5 months ago
Damn this was funn... REally gaives me material for one of my classes... Yeah...
uriangatobataclan 5 months ago
Contrary to what you suggest, structuralist theorists didn't buy into the 'intentional fallacy', nor is Derrida known for articulating/identifying the intentional fallacy-- You'd want to go to the American New Critics (Cleanth Brooks, esp, as he coins the term) and Roland Barthes ('The Death of the Author'). Though it's fair to say that Derrida had no interest in uncovering authorial intent, and that he considered such a project impossible and pointless, to boot.
dcfoster86 5 months ago
THIS IS BULLSHIT, show some respect to Derrida
ciberlucia 6 months ago 6
Derrida would be amused but not impressed. Deconstruction is the philosopher's way of saying that literature is to blame for the ambiguities and failures in his methods, not his search for being. Derrida was not playing games. So, who's to blame? Philosophers or poets? Derrida, you see, corrected Heidegger's deathbed regression toward poetry. BTW, he hated Hollywood and this sort of tripe.
Neobarone 8 months ago 2
@Neobarone I think that "amusing" is the aim here, not in-depth scholarly insight. Don't get too fixated on seriousness, it will do you no good.
That said, I found these enjoyable, please do more!
freshprinceofdonair 5 months ago
this just scratches the surface.
facepalm.jpg
asinkingship 8 months ago
@asinkingship
really? I thought all of Derrida's work could easily fit into a minute? /sarcasm
Gidwan 5 months ago
@Gidwan
Derrida feared that people would reduce his philosophy or misinterpret his words, I just wonder what he would think this one minute video.
asinkingship 5 months ago
@asinkingship [Derrida feared that people would reduce his philosophy or misinterpret his words...]
How can one misinterpret his work when he himself advocated the position that the meaning of a text is not only divorced from but also continues on without its author? Deconstructionists, indeed, often seem perfectly willing to use the power of their position, often as academic professionals, to punish people who disagree. Good thing meaning and truth are axiomatically independent, eh?
BuBBaGump014 5 months ago 3
very clever and Fun.
Do more. More!
S2Cents 9 months ago
very clever and Fun
S2Cents 9 months ago
THIS IS AWESOME!!
coffeecake26n 10 months ago
Dude your awesome, it was like a punch to the head
volcano696 11 months ago
not going to lie this is really awesome, made sense and made me lol a lot
shades156248 11 months ago
a) neat!
b) pretty useful!
Thanks for making (and posting) this video.
variousletters 1 year ago
i wish you wouldnt have cussed.....then i could show this class
vandersteen18 1 year ago
@vandersteen18 you could use these comments to make a point about how anonymity changes how we behave online
portal1337 11 months ago
i don't have to make a mark to make it in philosophy whose the idiot most philosophers were street walking geniuses have you ever read a philosophy book ..seriously your an idiot
adrianeaglrck 1 year ago
Comment removed
adrianeaglrck 1 year ago
Comment removed
adrianeaglrck 1 year ago
@adrianeaglrck Pretty weird Irish accent.
malkooth 1 year ago
Comment removed
adrianeaglrck 1 year ago
@adrianeaglrck You certainly can't explain it, fap to it maybe but explain it no.
malkooth 1 year ago
Comment removed
adrianeaglrck 1 year ago
@adrianeaglrck One of the biggest idiots I know graduated from college with a bachelors in philosophy. You'll have to make a mark to make anything out of it which I predict you'll never do.
malkooth 1 year ago
here my mark...wait for it...wait for....yes i'm doing now! yes its a big pile of shit i just took all over your comments thats enough to get me a honorary degree
adrianeaglrck 1 year ago
Comment removed
adrianeaglrck 1 year ago
@adrianeaglrck Your just an open wound since your mommy won't fuck you anymore.
malkooth 1 year ago
your mom still does so i'm happy
adrianeaglrck 1 year ago
Man, great Video, please.... maybe Foucault next? :-)
WorstCaseSzenarios 1 year ago
Oh my god....love deconstructionist Lord of the Rings. <3
gaelicwolf 1 year ago
derrida would be proud im sure...great video!
svenso777 1 year ago
I love this! MOAR pls! Like, do it for Foucalt, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, just do it for everybody!
KrushKrackKruck 1 year ago
3 minute philosophy rip off fail
hoboguru 1 year ago
please tell me where you got that guy sitting on the chair with shitload of papers around him photo from?
aura113 1 year ago
@aura113 Youtube doesn't let me post the link, but if you google "professor messy desk" it should appear on the first page of images.
markobooko 1 year ago
pure gold.
derrida says: FUCK NO!
Dodger718 1 year ago