Деконструкція культури у філософемах дерріди

Abstract

We can outline a Number of problems in philosophy and culture of the 20 th century that are diagnosed by Jacques Derrida, among others. According to Derrida's statement, philosophy is a quintessence of culture and is universal in its quintessenciality. Global world presents an increasing interaction among national philosophemes and concepts with the communication inside the philosophical society which is becoming more transparent, getting the quality of penetrability. Philosophy has always had its source in a language, but a language is also a result of philosophical processes. This begets a unique phenomenon that is called philosophical idiom. As a matter of fact, it sets the limit for translation of certain philosophical system into another philosophical system’s language, shaped in a different way. Derrida talks about a nationalism in philosophy and some strange paradox that takes place in the interaction of regional and universal philosophies. Basically, he appeals to the state of culture in the 90-s, the culture, undoubtedly, globalized already at that time. We can call it a regional isolation, but it can also be called culture’s attempt to save certain identity and not lose its self in the endlessly pellucid world. Jacques Derrida contributes to philosophy a completely new principle. In his own words it is called «deconstruction». Postmodern philosophy has its basis in Heidegger’s destruction. This was a central concept for Heidegger himself and we can surely say that postmodern philosophy moves from Heidegger’s destruction to Derrida’s deconstruction. Actually, Derrida has his own way of applying deconstruction principle not only to philosophical systems, but also to the culture itself. There has been a certain central concept in philosophy for centuries. It could be spirit, substance, logos, etc. This kind of concept always was a backbone principle, a logical center. This is exactly the kind of concept Derrida protested against. Calling it logocentrism, Derrida uses his deconstruction method and the main key to deconstruction method, differanse, to oppose it. Derrida’s task is to remove that strict structural systematicity and turn attention to the primordial word. It is so called qramma, one more term of Derrida. Philosopher talks about writing, about the status of writing in the culture. That’s where qramma originates from. It means not simply a word, but a written word. It’s clear that culture as a certain unity of written words is, firstly, completely textual, and, secondly, textual infinitely. Systematical philosophy almost dissolves in philosophemes. When we’re talking about a philosophical system we always mean a certain strict construction in which one proposition is necessarily a result of another proposition. That way we receive a more or less closed construction. When we’re talking about philosophemes we imply much more freely organized discourses, which are also aesthetical. Such kind of discourse allows metaphors, associations, allusions and everything that is a part of vital culture’s tissue, not necessarily using philosophical terms. This is a kind of philosopheme postmodernism is attracted to. It is in harmony with the state of culture it has been functioning in, it is also reproducing it. As far as philosophemes, unlike philosophical systems, have a huge area of interpretation chances, this area can be a field of different points’ of view confrontation. We need to say that not any of them is trying to be abundantly legitimate. Philosophy must move from strict systematicity to philosophemes, because any philosopheme isn’t legitimate at all from power’s point of view. Philosopheme is free in its core and, generally speaking, liberates philosophy from universal methodology. Jacques Derrida established a new style in philosophy and, generally, a new style in culture. We can see a lot of consequences of this style’s influence on many philosophers who are now considered to be the classics of postmodern philosophy.