-----Original Message-----Thank you, Stoney. Well, it seems clear that he was being philosophical rather than historical. Which is good, because this is bad history, but it may be good philosophy.
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Peter Kirk
>...
Third, Derrida says that the written word preceded the spoken. I never
understood this tho, but maybe you do.
Does he really say this? ...
Or is he speaking in some kind of riddle?
It's been decades since I read Derrida, but as I recall it's a sort of
myth for denying that the written word should be treated as an
inadequate substitute for the spoken word. Writing has an ambiguous
presence very different - and not derivative - from the 'real presence'
of spoken logos. It's all very Philosophical: as you say, a kind of
riddle.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.