지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The method of deconstruction is connected with what Derrida calls the ‘metaphysics of presence’. It is Derrida’s contention that traditional metaphysical philosophers rely on the assumption of an immediately available area of certainty. The origin and foundation of most philosophers’ theories is presence. Derrida, however, denies the possibility of this presence and in so doing removes the ground from which philosophers have in general proceeded. By denying presence, Derrida is denying that there is a present in the sense of a single definable moment which is ‘now’. Speech has been regarded as prior because it is closer to the possibility of presence. It is closer because speech implies immediacy. In speech meaning is apparently immanent, above all when, using the inner voice of consciousness, we speak to ourselves. In the moment of speech we appear to grasp its meaning and are thereby able to capture presence, as if the meaning was decided once and for all. Thus, unlike writing, speech is linked to the apparent moment and place of presence and for this reason has had priority over writing. For Derrida, therefore, phonocentrism is one of the effect of presence. Derrida’ s attempt to deconstruct the opposition between speech and writing is linked to the uncovering of the metaphysics of presence as a whole. Western philosophy is also ‘logocentric’. Western philosophy is assumed that there is an essence, or truth which acts as the foundation of all our beliefs ; hence there seems to be a disposition, a longing, for a ‘transcendental signifier’ which would directly relate, correspond, to a secure stable ‘transcendental signified’(Idea, God, Matter, etc.). This paper argues for the problems on the theological appropriation of Derrida’ s deconstructive thought. Within the interpretative framework the question of God is predetermined to result in ontological denial. For the orthodox theologians, deconstruction incites the presumption of the theology of God’s death. Theology therefore considers deconstruction as a nihilism. John Milbank as a representative criticizes nihilistic elements in deconstruction and rejects deconstruction as a possible theological partner. But I hope to manifest that more minute reading of the deconstructive thought of Derrida must reappraise this nihilist misunderstanding. Derrida’ s interest in the limits of language is precisely a recognition of the ‘other’ that can never be thought. This approacher will illustrate how this impossible thought prevents deconstruction from maintaining the type of nihilism. In this process, some relationship between deconstruction and negative theology, between deconstruction and theological paradox is illustrated, and the relationships deepen an understanding of common interests in faith and liberating discourse. I come to a conclusion that Derrida can help theology to escape nihilism, and to maintain the question of God.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
데리다와 형이상학 해체
철학
1995 .05
-
해체와 부정신학
한국기독교신학논총
2015 .10
-
Deconstruction of Speech Levels
Korea Journal
1992 .09
-
김남천 「등불」의 서사구조와 자기 지시적 상호텍스트성의 관계
우리말글
2018 .06
-
해체론과 윤리 : 탈현대적 윤리의 정초를 위한 한 시론
철학연구
2004 .05
-
윤리학과 해체론 사이에서 : 레비나스와 데리다 가로지르기
새한영어영문학
2013 .02
-
쟈크 데리다의 후설 해체 : 의미기원의 발굴과 해체
철학
1996 .08
-
마크 테일러의 해체신학에서의 해석학적 문제
한국조직신학논총
2007 .01
-
데리다의 차연과 나가르주나의 공
코기토
2018 .06
-
‘유럽’의 해체 - 데리다의 『다른 곶』 (L’Autre Cap)을 중심으로
철학연구
2015 .03
-
조이스의 해체주의: 더블린 사람들의 중심부재와 그 인식
제임스조이스 저널
2005 .01
-
해체철학의 선구들 : 노자로부터 엘리엇, 데리다까지
동서비교문학저널
2000 .12
-
J. Derrida와 莊子
한국학(구 정신문화연구)
1991 .12
-
데리다의 텍스트
철학사상
2008 .02
-
주체성의 계보학 : 헤겔, 훗설, 하이데거, 데리다
신학연구
2014 .06
-
한국적 신학 : 회고와 전망
한국기독교신학논총
2001 .10
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0