Derrida and Ricoeur: A Case of Mistaken Identity (And Difference)

Abstract

Heidegger, believing he had reclaimed original impulse of philosophy, called Nietzsche last metaphysician. Ironically, since that pronouncement Heidegger himself has been accorded same epithet. It is inevitable that question arises as to why these philosophers considered metaphysics moribund. In this postmodern time when ways and means of reasoning can appear flawed beyond redemption, various diagnoses (not necessarily of an optimistic nature) abound. Philosophizing is passe. Taking risk of also being labeled passe, I would like to focus on an exchange between Paul Ricoeur and Jacques Derrida as symptomatic of one of vital issues at stake.Each thinker presents a possible response to Heidegger's dictum that the metaphorical exists only within metaphysical.' Their debate questions not only philosophical enterprise as traditionally conceived and pursued (which is hardly a novel procedure) but also very foundations of philosophy in language. The question then shifts from one concerning mode of existence of metaphysics to that of linguistic conditions of meaning and coherence. For it is not simply existence of metaphysics that is being contested but also forms by which we express our understanding of ourselves and of our world. The crucial discussions between Ricoeur and Derrida occur in fol-