Re: not playing so nice

"My understanding of Derrida (from my limited reading) is that these two things are very closely related, in fact -- that logocentrism is the basis of ethnocentrism so to undermine the latter you have to undermine the former."

Jim -- A rejection of logocentrism leaves no basis by which one can conclude that racism is wrong, absolutely. Denying the stability of language means that racist speech is not racist, as its absolute meaning is lost. Therefore, we have left only "heterogeneous" standards that are, of course, "constantly evolving." By contrast, it is easy to arrive at such a simple conclusion that racism is wrong -- for its rejection of humanity, that someone or some people are judged to be less than human. This conclusion has as its basis logocentrism; there is no visceral reaction that depends on the contemporary fashionability of certain stereotypes. There is instead a general, truthful principle applied to evaluate and condemn racism.

But you want logocentrism to be undermined? If that is the world in which you would demand a racist be judged (Ashcroft is guilty, because everyone knows it! Roar!), language be evaluated (anyone who disagrees with me is intolerant, and a sanctimonious lizard at that! Roar!), and philosophies that make distinctions between people (ethnocentrism as an example) be considered, then I think it's time to find some revered temples and start building your front porch.

That, and have lots of meaningless, loveless sex, too. Maybe even with sheep.

luke

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH