Signature, Event, Context by Jacques Derrida

     In this essay, Derrida has raised the issue of communication. He puts a question does the word communication communicate a determined content, an identifiable meaning or a deceivable value? Generally, we have the understanding that communication communicates. Western metaphysics also believes that communication is a transmission of meaning, vehicle of thought and passage of meaning. Derrida says that communication is polymeric having different meanings and plurality in nature. Can this polymeric be reduced to one context? Does it give singular meaning? For Derrida, meaning depends on context. Communication is said to be context-dependent. Contextual factors like age, sex, attitude, custom, culture etc. affect what we communicate. It context determine our meaning, is there any scientific notion of context? Derrida says no, he validated context but invalidated the exactitude of the context. Context is never absolutely determinable, its determination is never certain or saturated context is created in the language. As soon as context enter in language, context does not function. Derrida also talks about writing in this essay. Why do we write? Derrida brings reference of condillac. Condillac says men write because.
1. They have something to communicate.
2. They are capable to write.
3. They write to make known to those who are absent.
4. They have something in their brain.
5. Writers want to make clear for those who are absent.
     The word “absence” strikes Derrida-it is whose absence them? whether of addressor, listener or reader etc. one writes in order to communicate something to those who are absent. Then it is the absence of addressor also. Writing works in the absence of addressor himself. Even when the writer is not present to explain what he means to say, that time too writing works, because writing is iterable or reproducible. In the place of one original text, we can produce innumerable copies of it.
     Text fulfill the lack of writes absence because of it iterability. It means iterability makes it work in the acsence of writer or addressor. Derrida questions whether context is fixed in writing or not? He says that every text breaks with the context and is replaced by infinite contexts. Then is context fixed in speech? Speech is also determined by the context. Speech also changes according to time, space, situation and perception. Some speech is understood differently by different listeners. Therefore context is changeable in speech too. Speech can also be iterable as a result meaning does not become fixed. Hence, context is never fixed in both written or verbal communication. We see, communication depends on context but the context is never fixed, communication does not communicate. So language is in capable of communication. Communication is blocked everywhere. Therefore, there is no proper communication for Derrida.

Friedrich Nietzsche “The Use and Abuse of History” deals with the dynamics of remembering and forgetting, which Nietzsche sees as the exclusive characteristic of human animal. Unlike the beast, human beings have to come to grips with the problem of leaving to forget an action, which presupposes the prior ability to remember. Whether he wants it or not, man has history. Nietzsche grants that man needs history in three ways. Read More...

Immanuel Kant The enlightenment, an intellectual movement in eighteenth century Europe celebrated human reason and scientific thought as the instrument of liberation from the superstition and ignorance inherited from the past. The period believed that man, at his best, was a reasonable creature committed to a reasonable activity of understanding the world, the creation of a reasonable creator. Read More...

Adorno and Horkheimer According to Adorno and Horkheimer, individuals are becoming subservient to the absolute power of capitalism in this age of mechanical reproduction. In this age, we are losing our subjectivity and we are all the time judged by the market value exchanged system which makes different between appearance and reality. Technology has acquired power in the society. Technological rationale is the rationale of domination itself. Read More...

Levi-Strauss Levi-Strauss is a sociologist, anthropologist and structuralists. As a structuralists, he sees structure in everything. In this essay he basically takes about structure of myth. He says that myth has internal and external structure. Regarding the myth there are different opinions. Sociologists say that a society expresses itself in the form of myth. A myth represents a given society. Read More...

Jugen Habermas Modernity is rooted in the development of Enlightenment. Habermas talks of Max Weber’s separation of religion and metaphysics into three independent spheres. Science, morality and art. This division, Habermas says, ultimately gave space to three dimensions of culture, truth, morality and beauty, knowledge, justice and taste. Eventually, the project of Enlightenment aimed to develop these three aspects objective science, universal morality and low, and autonomous art. Read More...

Jacques Derrida Difference has the sense of difference (S) as well as delay and deferral (detainment, hold up, wait). It seems the word difference were a fusion of difference and the French verb differ which can mean to differ as well as to defer and delay. Derrida accepts the sussurean idea of language as a system of difference but extends the principal to its ultimate consequences. Read More...

George Luckacs In this essay, Lukacs has darted his criticism to the bourgeois concept of modernism which has forgotten man and society and given focus to the form rather than content. The so-called Russian formalist did not care about content, only gave emphasis to the from. Lukacs says that content determines form and there is no content of which man himself in not the focal point. Read More...