Logocentrism and the Gathering Λόγος: Heidegger, Derrida, and the Contextual Centers of Meaning

Abstract

Derrida's deconstructive strategy of reading texts can be understood as a way of highlighting the irreducible plurality of discursive meaning that undermines the traditional Western "logocentric" desire for an absolute point of reference. While his notion of logocentrism was modeled on Heidegger's articulation of the traditional ontotheological framework of Aristotelian metaphysics, Derrida detects a logocentric remnant in Heidegger's own interpretation of gathering (Versammlung) as the basic movement of λόγος, discursiveness. However, I suggest that Derrida here touches upon a certain limit of deconstruction. As Derrida himself points out, the "decentering" effect of deconstruction does not simply abolish the unifying and focalizing function of discourse. Insofar as deconstruction involves reading and interpreting, it cannot completely evade narrative focalization. Rather, both Heidegger and Derrida can be understood as addressing the radical contextuality of all discursive centers and focal points as well as the consequent impossibility of an ultimate and definitive metanarrative.

‘Like the boy who cried wolf’: The tensions of hospitality and role of deconstruction in dyadic discursive therapy interactions with children and their caregivers

“…There is an entirely logical reasoning at work here which solves the pain of the boy’s loneliness. In doing so, Emily renders visible alternative ‘discursive chains of reference’ (Backman, 2012: 70) which draws the adult’s attention to a new meaning of children’s crying.…”

“…He defined logocentrism as the establishment of absolute meaning, which subordinates all other possible meaning (Derrida and Spivak, 1976). When certain meaning structures become central, other ‘discursive chains of reference’ are no longer possible (Backman, 2012: 70). Put more simply, these spoken behavioural accounts can become the dominant meaning-making structure, which subordinates alternative meaning-making possibilities in the therapeutic encounter.…”

Why Seeing Is Not Believing and Why Believing Is Seeing: On the Politics of Sight

“…8 5 See also Heidegger (1927, 32-3;1939, 213;1975, 70-1). For a detailed discussion of what the gathering ability of language entails, see Backman (2012). 6 Note that this gathering ability of language has an ontological impulse absent in other frameworks (e.g., Foucault 1980).…”

From différance to justice: Derrida and Heidegger’s “Anaximander’s Saying”

“…11 7 Derrida (1981, p. 44). 8 For recent accounts of the relation between Heidegger and Derrida, see Dastur (2011), Backman (2012. 9 de Boer (1997, p. 152).…”