Podcasts about derridean

Send us a textLee and Simon talk about things in life that are abstract and concrete, some things about Lee's knitting, freedom of thought and action, being happy in difficult times.Things covered: Being homeowners, sliding doors, pocket doors, porta a libero (bifold door), talking about futures (all part of an apartment update), a(nother) knitting update (including the possibility of a knitted onesie), ribbing (more knitting), Lee reaches clickety-clackety on the pearl stitch but is not through the first series yet, counting stitches and losing track, hurt people hurt people, a sin is thought is as bad as a sin in action, freedom of thought and action (Alegre's Freedom to Think), marks made on the body, a bit of chatGPT action, Alan Carr's "Chatty Man", lining the pockets of another tech billionaire, pushback on the term "male privilege", Derridean deconstructions, Lee getting angry at billionaires (again), being happy in difficult times. Get in touch with Lee and Simon at info@midlifing.net. ---The Midlifing logo is adapted from an original image by H.L.I.T: https://www.flickr.com/photos/29311691@N05/8571921679 (CC BY 2.0)

Send us a Text Message.Simon and Lee share a tricky conversation about the politics of representation. Things they discuss: finding the note about the tricky subject, Lee extemporising, representation and optics, box ticking, Bayo Akomolafe and representation on slave ships, Simon's confusion about representation, the end game of the politics of representation, Guild HE report on "Understanding the lived experience of ethnic minority students in postgraduate research", the vitality of role models that we see ourselves in, visible markers of identity, female vice-chancellors and a patriarchal narrative, Lee goes all Derridean on us and getting to the point where the binary has been dismantled, gender-based violence in the UK and positioning women as chattle.Get in touch with Lee and Simon at info@midlifing.net. ---The Midlifing logo is adapted from an original image by H.L.I.T: https://www.flickr.com/photos/29311691@N05/8571921679 (CC BY 2.0)

The critical social justice advocates in the United States have been hard at work over the past 20 years pushing the class struggle and race struggle conflict theory of Postcolonial Theory in nearly every facet of western education. Postcolonial theory advocates claim that African Americans, Asians and Latinos (of which I am – once again – of Cuban descent) belong categorically to “disparate people groups” and need to be liberated, or, “decolonized.” And of course they refer back to the examples of imperial European powers colonized Africa, Asia and South America as their examples. But that isn't what social justice advocates mean by “decolonization.” In the Social Justice sense, the term decolonization refers to postmodern Foucauldian and Derridean concepts of power (https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-power-systemic/) and knowledge (https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-knowledges/), So in this twisted definition, decolonization seeks to read everything through a framework of colonialism and uncover how it has shaped all sorts of power dynamics in society: even the Christian Faith. -Michael O'Fallon Show notes: -Decolonize Your Faith This Lent: A Reading List: https://sojo.net/articles/decolonize-your-faith-lent-reading-list http://sovereignnations.com Support Sovereign Nations: paypal.me/sovnations patreon.com/sovnations Follow Sovereign Nations: sovereignnations.com/subscribe facebook.com/SovereignNations twitter.com/SovNations youtube.com/SovereignNations rumble.com/c/sovnations instagram.com/sovnations/ minds.com/sovnations?referrer=sovnations parler.com/profile/sovnations © 2022 Sovereign Nations. All rights reserved.

One of the fifty most influential living philosophers, a “self-promoting charlatan” (Brian Leiter), and the orchestrator of an “online orgy of stupidity” (Ray Brassier). In Skirmishes: With Friends, Enemies, and Neutrals (Punctum Books, 2020), Graham Harman responds with flair and wit to some of his best-known critics and fellow travelers. Pulling no punches, Harman gives a masterclass in philosophical argumentation by dissecting, analyzing, and countering their criticism, be it from the Husserlian, Heideggerian, or Derridean corner. At the same time, Skirmishes provides an excellent introduction to the hottest debates in Speculative Realism and Object-Oriented Ontology, a speculative style of philosophy long foreclosed by the biases of mainstream continental thought, but which has turned in recent years into one of the most encompassing philosophies of our time, with a major impact on the arts, humanities, and architecture. Part One considers four prominent books on speculative realism. In dialogue with Tom Sparrow's The End of Phenomenology, Harman expresses agreement with Sparrow's critique while taking issue with Lee Braver's “transgressive realism” as not realist enough. Turning to Steven Shaviro's The Universe of Things, Harman defends his own object-oriented model against Shaviro's brand of process philosophy, while also engaging in side-debate with Levi R. Bryant's distinction between virtual proper being and local manifestations. In the third chapter, on Peter Gratton's Speculative Realism: Problems and Prospects, Harman opposes the author's attempt to use Derridean notions of time and difference against Speculative Realism, in what amounts to his most extensive engagement with Derrida to date. Chapter Four gives us Harman's response to Peter Wolfendale's massive polemic in Object-Oriented Philosophy, which he shows is based on a failed criticism of Harman's reading of Heidegger and a grumpy commitment to rationalist kitsch. Part Two responds to a series of briefer criticisms of object-oriented ontology. When Alberto Toscano accuses Harman and Bruno Latour of “neo-monadological” and anti-scientific thinking, Harman responds that the philosophical factors pushing Leibniz into monadology are still valid today. When Christopher Norris mocks Harman for seeing merit in the occasionalist school, he shows why Norris's middle-of-the-road scientific realism misses the point. In response to Dan Zahavi's contention that phenomenology has little to learn from speculative realism, Harman exposes the holes in Zahavi's reasoning. In a final response, Harman gives a point-by-point answer to Stephen Mulhall's critical foray in the London Review of Books. Amidst these lively debates, Harman sheds new light on what he regards as the central bias of philosophical modernism, which he terms the taxonomical standpoint. It is a book sure to provoke lively controversy among both friends and foes of object-oriented thought. Adam Bobeck is a PhD candidate in Cultural Anthropology at the University of Leipzig. His PhD is entitled “Object-Oriented Azadari: Shi'i Muslim Rituals and Ontology”. For more about his work, see www.adambobeck.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

One of the fifty most influential living philosophers, a “self-promoting charlatan” (Brian Leiter), and the orchestrator of an “online orgy of stupidity” (Ray Brassier). In Skirmishes: With Friends, Enemies, and Neutrals (Punctum Books, 2020), Graham Harman responds with flair and wit to some of his best-known critics and fellow travelers. Pulling no punches, Harman gives a masterclass in philosophical argumentation by dissecting, analyzing, and countering their criticism, be it from the Husserlian, Heideggerian, or Derridean corner. At the same time, Skirmishes provides an excellent introduction to the hottest debates in Speculative Realism and Object-Oriented Ontology, a speculative style of philosophy long foreclosed by the biases of mainstream continental thought, but which has turned in recent years into one of the most encompassing philosophies of our time, with a major impact on the arts, humanities, and architecture. Part One considers four prominent books on speculative realism. In dialogue with Tom Sparrow's The End of Phenomenology, Harman expresses agreement with Sparrow's critique while taking issue with Lee Braver's “transgressive realism” as not realist enough. Turning to Steven Shaviro's The Universe of Things, Harman defends his own object-oriented model against Shaviro's brand of process philosophy, while also engaging in side-debate with Levi R. Bryant's distinction between virtual proper being and local manifestations. In the third chapter, on Peter Gratton's Speculative Realism: Problems and Prospects, Harman opposes the author's attempt to use Derridean notions of time and difference against Speculative Realism, in what amounts to his most extensive engagement with Derrida to date. Chapter Four gives us Harman's response to Peter Wolfendale's massive polemic in Object-Oriented Philosophy, which he shows is based on a failed criticism of Harman's reading of Heidegger and a grumpy commitment to rationalist kitsch. Part Two responds to a series of briefer criticisms of object-oriented ontology. When Alberto Toscano accuses Harman and Bruno Latour of “neo-monadological” and anti-scientific thinking, Harman responds that the philosophical factors pushing Leibniz into monadology are still valid today. When Christopher Norris mocks Harman for seeing merit in the occasionalist school, he shows why Norris's middle-of-the-road scientific realism misses the point. In response to Dan Zahavi's contention that phenomenology has little to learn from speculative realism, Harman exposes the holes in Zahavi's reasoning. In a final response, Harman gives a point-by-point answer to Stephen Mulhall's critical foray in the London Review of Books. Amidst these lively debates, Harman sheds new light on what he regards as the central bias of philosophical modernism, which he terms the taxonomical standpoint. It is a book sure to provoke lively controversy among both friends and foes of object-oriented thought. Adam Bobeck is a PhD candidate in Cultural Anthropology at the University of Leipzig. His PhD is entitled “Object-Oriented Azadari: Shi'i Muslim Rituals and Ontology”. For more about his work, see www.adambobeck.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

One of the fifty most influential living philosophers, a “self-promoting charlatan” (Brian Leiter), and the orchestrator of an “online orgy of stupidity” (Ray Brassier). In Skirmishes: With Friends, Enemies, and Neutrals (Punctum Books, 2020), Graham Harman responds with flair and wit to some of his best-known critics and fellow travelers. Pulling no punches, Harman gives a masterclass in philosophical argumentation by dissecting, analyzing, and countering their criticism, be it from the Husserlian, Heideggerian, or Derridean corner. At the same time, Skirmishes provides an excellent introduction to the hottest debates in Speculative Realism and Object-Oriented Ontology, a speculative style of philosophy long foreclosed by the biases of mainstream continental thought, but which has turned in recent years into one of the most encompassing philosophies of our time, with a major impact on the arts, humanities, and architecture. Part One considers four prominent books on speculative realism. In dialogue with Tom Sparrow's The End of Phenomenology, Harman expresses agreement with Sparrow's critique while taking issue with Lee Braver's “transgressive realism” as not realist enough. Turning to Steven Shaviro's The Universe of Things, Harman defends his own object-oriented model against Shaviro's brand of process philosophy, while also engaging in side-debate with Levi R. Bryant's distinction between virtual proper being and local manifestations. In the third chapter, on Peter Gratton's Speculative Realism: Problems and Prospects, Harman opposes the author's attempt to use Derridean notions of time and difference against Speculative Realism, in what amounts to his most extensive engagement with Derrida to date. Chapter Four gives us Harman's response to Peter Wolfendale's massive polemic in Object-Oriented Philosophy, which he shows is based on a failed criticism of Harman's reading of Heidegger and a grumpy commitment to rationalist kitsch. Part Two responds to a series of briefer criticisms of object-oriented ontology. When Alberto Toscano accuses Harman and Bruno Latour of “neo-monadological” and anti-scientific thinking, Harman responds that the philosophical factors pushing Leibniz into monadology are still valid today. When Christopher Norris mocks Harman for seeing merit in the occasionalist school, he shows why Norris's middle-of-the-road scientific realism misses the point. In response to Dan Zahavi's contention that phenomenology has little to learn from speculative realism, Harman exposes the holes in Zahavi's reasoning. In a final response, Harman gives a point-by-point answer to Stephen Mulhall's critical foray in the London Review of Books. Amidst these lively debates, Harman sheds new light on what he regards as the central bias of philosophical modernism, which he terms the taxonomical standpoint. It is a book sure to provoke lively controversy among both friends and foes of object-oriented thought. Adam Bobeck is a PhD candidate in Cultural Anthropology at the University of Leipzig. His PhD is entitled “Object-Oriented Azadari: Shi'i Muslim Rituals and Ontology”. For more about his work, see www.adambobeck.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

One of the fifty most influential living philosophers, a “self-promoting charlatan” (Brian Leiter), and the orchestrator of an “online orgy of stupidity” (Ray Brassier). In Skirmishes: With Friends, Enemies, and Neutrals (Punctum Books, 2020), Graham Harman responds with flair and wit to some of his best-known critics and fellow travelers. Pulling no punches, Harman gives a masterclass in philosophical argumentation by dissecting, analyzing, and countering their criticism, be it from the Husserlian, Heideggerian, or Derridean corner. At the same time, Skirmishes provides an excellent introduction to the hottest debates in Speculative Realism and Object-Oriented Ontology, a speculative style of philosophy long foreclosed by the biases of mainstream continental thought, but which has turned in recent years into one of the most encompassing philosophies of our time, with a major impact on the arts, humanities, and architecture. Part One considers four prominent books on speculative realism. In dialogue with Tom Sparrow's The End of Phenomenology, Harman expresses agreement with Sparrow's critique while taking issue with Lee Braver's “transgressive realism” as not realist enough. Turning to Steven Shaviro's The Universe of Things, Harman defends his own object-oriented model against Shaviro's brand of process philosophy, while also engaging in side-debate with Levi R. Bryant's distinction between virtual proper being and local manifestations. In the third chapter, on Peter Gratton's Speculative Realism: Problems and Prospects, Harman opposes the author's attempt to use Derridean notions of time and difference against Speculative Realism, in what amounts to his most extensive engagement with Derrida to date. Chapter Four gives us Harman's response to Peter Wolfendale's massive polemic in Object-Oriented Philosophy, which he shows is based on a failed criticism of Harman's reading of Heidegger and a grumpy commitment to rationalist kitsch. Part Two responds to a series of briefer criticisms of object-oriented ontology. When Alberto Toscano accuses Harman and Bruno Latour of “neo-monadological” and anti-scientific thinking, Harman responds that the philosophical factors pushing Leibniz into monadology are still valid today. When Christopher Norris mocks Harman for seeing merit in the occasionalist school, he shows why Norris's middle-of-the-road scientific realism misses the point. In response to Dan Zahavi's contention that phenomenology has little to learn from speculative realism, Harman exposes the holes in Zahavi's reasoning. In a final response, Harman gives a point-by-point answer to Stephen Mulhall's critical foray in the London Review of Books. Amidst these lively debates, Harman sheds new light on what he regards as the central bias of philosophical modernism, which he terms the taxonomical standpoint. It is a book sure to provoke lively controversy among both friends and foes of object-oriented thought. Adam Bobeck is a PhD candidate in Cultural Anthropology at the University of Leipzig. His PhD is entitled “Object-Oriented Azadari: Shi'i Muslim Rituals and Ontology”. For more about his work, see www.adambobeck.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Derrida is a notoriously difficult philosopher to understand. Some love him, others loathe him, and everyone struggles to comprehend him. Today, we embark on a journey of discovery with Derridean thought and the wider Post-structuralist movement. Joining us again is David Baker, distinguished professor in the Department of English and Comparative Literature at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Hamish Stewart and Max Forster speak with him.

In the 73rd episode of the remarkably consistent podcast General Snobbery, your favorite film deconstructionists turn their Derridean eye toward the 1980 film Altered States starring William "John" Hurt. Haven't heard of it? Well you should have! And now you will!

The twenty-sixth episode, in which Knackers and The Vadge are definitely not derelict in their Derridean double-reading duties with the Australian Unemployed Workers Union's Jeremy Poxon.

We discuss Isabel's paper on the Chora, "Signifying Absence: Destabilizing the Reception of Plato's Khôra." With our normal digressions into Sarte, Buddhism, Jewish mysticism, we eventually agree with Isabel's rejection of analytic philosophers who have characterized the Chora as 'matter' or 'space' and endorse a more Derridean understanding of it as something radically beyond conceptualization.

The philosopher Jacques Derrida reflected on what he called the aporia or dilemma of the gift. The upshot seems to be that it is virtually impossible truly to give a gift, for gift-giving always locks us into an economy of exchange and obligation. But there is one great exception to the Derridean dilemma, and that is the Lord God. Jesus’ recommendations in the magnificent Gospel for today are not for the natural person, but the supernatural person, who loves with the very love of God.

In this episode, Eric and Jacob talk to philosopher and "weak theologian" John Caputo, professor emeritus of philosophy at Villanova University and of religion at Syracuse. Particular topics include: Jack's new book on hermeneutics, the importance of demythologizing Heidegger, the supposed split (or not) between Gadamerian and Derridean reading, hermeneutics and the posthuman, and a delightful sermon from professor Caputo on the prologue to John's gospel. Next week, we'll be tackling Jürgen Moltmann's "A Theology of Hope," to go a bit against the anti-futurist grain that has been established so far in this show. You can find Caputo's book here: https://www.amazon.com/Hermeneutics-Facts-Interpretation-Age-Information-ebook/dp/B074Q5DZLY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539105110&sr=8-1&keywords=hermeneutics+facts+and+interpretation+in+the+age+of+information Support us on Patreon! Patreon.com/PTRPodcast Thanks to Matt Baker from The Catacombic Machine podcast for our logo design, and a shoutout to Josh Gasaway and the Luxury Cloud Service label for the use of their music. You can find more of their tunes here: https://luxurycloudservice.bandcamp.com/released

SynTalk thinks about the provocative questions of spectres, spirits, & ghosts, as themselves and as signifiers, while constantly wondering if they are an unnecessary residue. Can we think of the repressed voices in places of violence and ruin, using ideas of ghosts and haunting? What is the thing that haunts? What is the big deal about the ghosts? The concepts are derived off / from Plutarch, Ludwig Lavater, Thomas Lodge, Shakespeare, Nicholas Rowe, Heidegger, Freud, Weber, Adorno, Levinas, Tagore, Amos Tutuola, Derrida, Kurosawa, Arjun Appadurai, Stephen Greenblatt, Jean-Michel Rabaté, & Avery F. Gordon, among others. How the juxtaposition of the familiar with the unfamiliar creates the uncanny? Would something entirely unfamiliar be uncanny or just plain strange? Can the spectral be defined at all? How hauntology potentially challenges ontology? Do ghosts represent a world order where things are not arbitrary, and where actions have repercussions? How Shakespeare added a sense of wonder and mystery to the figure of the ghost, & made it substantial. Is Shakespeare’s Hamlet a Protestant with a Roman Catholic father? Should Hamlet have followed what the Ghost said? Are ghosts almost always ethically haunting figures? How the Derridean ghost is a bodyless body, and not a spirit without a body? Is every sense of our Being always haunted (with Nothingness)? How time is ‘out of joint’ with the ghostly. Does the uncertainty of the future always unsettle the past? Does modernity render the unexplainable superfluous, & what then are the ghosts of modernity? Is the cinematic consciousness ultimately a very spectral consciousness? What has been the life of ghosts in (say) Indian, Japanese, & South East Asian cinema? Why do Shakespeare’s tragic protagonists always see more than the others? Can a hyper rational mind experience the spectral? The links between Ur-Hamlet, 49, temporal twist, Macbeth, trauma, Hiroshima, turning table, purgatory, Madhumati, goblin, witches, The Babadook, spectral housing in Mumbai, magic, white noise, & Bhooter Bhobishyot. How the ghost expresses the yearning to grasp the mystery of history. Can we get hold of the Levinasian ‘trace’? Are there cultures without ghosts? Would our (otherwise sterile) lives need the pollution or infection of other worldliness in the future? Is it almost impossible to live without ghosts? ‘Can we speak of ghosts, without transforming the whole world and ourselves, too, into phantoms’? ‘Even if they are no longer, even if they are not yet…’. The SynTalkrs are: Prof. Shormishtha Panja (Shakespeare studies, literature, University of Delhi, New Delhi), & Dr. Suvadip Sinha (philosophy, cultural studies, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities).

Nathan Gilmour talks with Michial Farmer and Danny Anderson about postmodernism. Exploring in brief the Derridean, Foucaultian, and Gadamerian streams of thish twentieth-century cultural phenomenon, the trio likewise examines some Christian responses to the postmodern. Among the writers, concepts, and other realities tackled are differance, genealogy, progressivism, metanarrative, and relativism.

Nathan Gilmour talks with Michial Farmer and Danny Anderson about postmodernism. Exploring in brief the Derridean, Foucaultian, and Gadamerian streams of thish twentieth-century cultural phenomenon, the trio likewise examines some Christian responses to the postmodern. Among the writers, concepts, and other realities tackled are differance, genealogy, progressivism, metanarrative, and relativism.

ENL184-1_2010-01-14