Free-play? Fair-play! Defending Derrida

Nicole Anderson

doi:10.1080/10350330600823989

Free-play? Fair-play! Defending Derrida

Nicole Anderson^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to defend Derrida against negative interpretations of nihilism and ethical irresponsibility by arguing that Derrida's notion of différance, and deconstruction in general, is profoundly responsible. It is responsible because Derrida's différance is a condition of ethical possibility and impossibility, which enables individuals to take responsibility for decisionmaking away from the dichotomous either/or choices characteristic of normative ethics, thereby opening a political and ethical space for difference.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	407-420
Number of pages	14
Journal	Social Semiotics
Volume	16
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330600823989
Publication status	Published - Sept 2006

Keywords

Culture
Ethics
Jacques Derrida
Language
Politics
Textual free-play

Access to Document

10.1080/10350330600823989

Cite this

@article{31ac6cff75ef4106b6bc6e54bb75fe97,

title = "Free-play? Fair-play! Defending Derrida",

abstract = "The aim of this paper is to defend Derrida against negative interpretations of nihilism and ethical irresponsibility by arguing that Derrida's notion of diff{\'e}rance, and deconstruction in general, is profoundly responsible. It is responsible because Derrida's diff{\'e}rance is a condition of ethical possibility and impossibility, which enables individuals to take responsibility for decisionmaking away from the dichotomous either/or choices characteristic of normative ethics, thereby opening a political and ethical space for difference.",

keywords = "Culture, Ethics, Jacques Derrida, Language, Politics, Textual free-play",

author = "Nicole Anderson",

year = "2006",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1080/10350330600823989",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

pages = "407--420",

journal = "Social Semiotics",

issn = "1035-0330",

publisher = "Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Free-play? Fair-play! Defending Derrida

AU - Anderson, Nicole

PY - 2006/9

Y1 - 2006/9

N2 - The aim of this paper is to defend Derrida against negative interpretations of nihilism and ethical irresponsibility by arguing that Derrida's notion of différance, and deconstruction in general, is profoundly responsible. It is responsible because Derrida's différance is a condition of ethical possibility and impossibility, which enables individuals to take responsibility for decisionmaking away from the dichotomous either/or choices characteristic of normative ethics, thereby opening a political and ethical space for difference.

AB - The aim of this paper is to defend Derrida against negative interpretations of nihilism and ethical irresponsibility by arguing that Derrida's notion of différance, and deconstruction in general, is profoundly responsible. It is responsible because Derrida's différance is a condition of ethical possibility and impossibility, which enables individuals to take responsibility for decisionmaking away from the dichotomous either/or choices characteristic of normative ethics, thereby opening a political and ethical space for difference.

KW - Culture

KW - Ethics

KW - Jacques Derrida

KW - Language

KW - Politics

KW - Textual free-play

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84857978328

U2 - 10.1080/10350330600823989

DO - 10.1080/10350330600823989

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84857978328

SN - 1035-0330

VL - 16

SP - 407

EP - 420

JO - Social Semiotics

JF - Social Semiotics

IS - 3

ER -

Free-play? Fair-play! Defending Derrida

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this