Derrida's Deconstructionism and how it is a critique of the concepts Essay

Derridas Deconstructionism and how it is a critique of the concepts of presence and centre - Essay practice sessionIt is a critical and yet uncritical in its subversion. Just like looking on how to obliterate or to defeat an enemy http//www.geocities.com/philodept/diwatao/derrida_and_saussure.htmDifferent scholars and critics defined Deconstruction in their own way. Somehow with umteen definitions the theory became richer over the years. It represents a complex response to a variety of theoretical and philosophical movements of the twentieth century, most notably Husserlian phenomenology, Saussurean and French structuralism, and Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis http//prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/derrida/deconstruction.htmlDerrida starts with the structure, but he is not happy with the binary star structure and showed that dualisms are never equivalent but are hierarchically placed. He utter one pole is privileged at the expense of the other. The centre and presence are the originally attributed qualities to the speech, which have been continuing for a long time now. Speech has been apt(p) more importance, whereas the writing has been relegated into the secondary place. He said the logocentric tradition of the western thought since Plato has made the written word as a mere federal agency of the spoken word. Paul De Mann is another critic who adopted the same style of criticism. It is best understood as a textual strategy. He posed a challenge to metaphysical speculation. He argued Structure has continuously been neutralised or reduced.by giving it a centre or referring it to a point of presence, a frosty origin, Derrida (1978, p.278) and even the quantitative enlargement of adding historical experience does not help it. He started with exposing the problems of centred discourses. Derrida argues that the structure ascertain these discourses (including structuralist theory itself) always presupposes a centre that ensures a point of origin, mean ing, being, or presence. What troubles Derrida is that the centre determines a given systems structure but is itself strangely above or transcendent of such structural analysis or scrutiny http//www.usp.nus.edu.sg/post/poldiscourse/spivak/deconstruction.html His argument is that the centre that ensures a presence. The presence, he says, is the original state and should come first, on the button like how the world is present around us, and it is connected to the consciousness and self-reflection and gives a meaning. This means, presence is the predicate for a texts meaning, according to Derrida. It is accepted that Derrida had great influence on the intellectual thinking of the world. The paper he presented to seat Hopkins University in 1966 changed the critical movement in United States. In this paper he uses the structure, structuralist theory magic spell saying that there exists a centre in every structure. He argues that this is needed by the readers because it is expressed t hat there is an existing presence. The centre is the main unity that supports the structure, which would not have contained much meaning without that centre. if we strain to undo the centring concept of consciousness by asserting the disruptive counterforce of the unconscious we are in danger of introducing a bracing centre, because we cannot choose but enter the conceptual system (conscious/unconscious) we are trying to dislodge, Selden (1985, p.144).Deconstruction and poststructuralism have been in close terms