Derrida and Deconstruction Theories - Essay Example

Further, Derrida asserts that “all of these aspects are linked with presence and more valued or treasured aspect than the other, which is connected with absence” (Derrida 33). Deconstruction theory presents the metaphysics of presence by locating its ideal binary oppositions and illustrating the speciousness of their order by refuting the potentiality of understanding the superior or powerful element of the hierarchy or order in the absence of its inferior or less powerful counterpart. Refuting an inner or intrinsic and absolute implication or meaning to one of the aspects of the order or hierarchy ‘difference’ is unraveled. In this case, Derrida asserts that difference refers to the perceptual sequence of contacts between existence or presence and absence. In this sense, an idea is constructed, understood, and located in terms of what it is not, and the self-efficient implication is never attained.

It is important to note that Western language and thought have always been at the center of determining absolute truth. This presents hurdles or limits on what humans can think or believe. It offers a platform for existence or being and for knowing (how people think). Deconstruction theory failed to identify if God plays a role in determining the absolute truth, which neglects the concepts of uncertainties. Instead, Derrida states that any concept of a fixed center was a structure or configuration of authority imposed on people by their past or by societal institutions (Silverman 44-45).

Derrida’s deconstruction theory aimed to call for re-evaluation and re-assessment of all western ideas and values founded on the Kantian critique of human thought or reason. Deconstruction principles were built on elemental oppositions, which all dialogue has to highlight if it aims to make reasonable arguments and sound decisions. This is because identity is perceived as constructs, which are in a position to generate meaning via the interplay of difference within a scheme of different signs (Derrida 111).

Critique of post-structuralism movement
Postmodernist philosophers such as Nietzsche believed that the earth is full of disorder or confusion and it has no objective or aim. Post-structuralism refutes the concept of a literary text containing a solitary purpose or meaning or a single being or existence. Instead, post-structuralism advocates that every person or reader establish a new and personal meaning, purpose, and being/existence for any given text. Post-structuralism has been criticized for the failure to address questions from a realist perception. Post-structuralism does little to explain the self-reflective celebration, which gives an individual the freedom to decide and choose any or all subject positions.

Post-structuralism dismisses the ability of people to learn and understand the world as an entirety on the basis that it is a contemptible effort to construct or constitute grand narratives (Besley 65-69). Derridian ideas reject these arguments and assert that people should be given the opportunity to reason or think for themselves.

Foucault and his views as a poststructuralist and what he says about language or feminism
Foucault based his arguments about post-structuralism on the ground that the discursive formation and epistemological claims of several sciences and past account of certain discourses as particular knowledge or power complexes (Foucault and Rabinow 77-79). Foucault focused to identify and locate the real properties of what he called the western episteme that forms the basic knowledge of western nations as they have contributed to European knowledge since the enlightenment period. They were stabilized in the modern era when different human sciences came into existence. Foucault argued that there was no structure in the past or historical process, which implied that there was no meaning or dialectical process of development or progress. Instead, he discovered a fragmented reason or thought at the end of civilization. He called this thought episteme (Rorty 99).

Foucault argued that discourse is an epistemic construction, which should encourage reason or rationalism from medieval thinking to modern ways of thinking guided by intuition. Therefore, he argued that post-structuralism should be based on reason or rationalism. Foucault also asserted that there was no specific form of knowledge such as political economy or state but discrete practices of authority via rules and regulation guiding sex and imprisonment, which could be learned or studied in their respective independent spaces. Foucault's ideas on feminism focused to discuss the rights of women. For instance, he argued that there was a need for equal access to education since it was the basis of human knowledge.