What do you think?
Merleau-Ponty and Derrida: Intertwining Embodiment and Alterity (Volume 32)
While there have been many essays devoted to comparing the work of Maurice Merleau-Ponty with that of Jacques Derrida, there has been no sustained book-length treatment of these two French philosophers. Additionally, many of the essays presuppose an oppositional relationship between them, and between phenomenology and deconstruction more generally. Jack Reynolds systematically explores their relationship by analyzing each philosopher in terms of two important and related issues—embodiment and alterity. Focusing on areas with which they are not commonly associated (e.g., Derrida on the body and Merleau-Ponty on alterity) makes clear that their work cannot be adequately characterized in a strictly oppositional way. Merleau-Ponty and Intertwining Embodiment and Alterity proposes the possibility of a Merleau-Ponty-inspired philosophy that does not so avowedly seek to extricate itself from phenomenology, but that also cannot easily be dismissed as simply another instantiation of the metaphysics of presence. Reynolds argues that there are salient ethico-political reasons for choosing an alternative that accords greater attention to our embodied situation. As the first full-length monograph comparing the philosophers, Merleau-Ponty and Derrida will interest scholars and students in European philosophy and teachers of courses dealing with deconstruction.
- GenresPhilosophy
208 pages, Hardcover
First published October 29, 2004
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
April 8, 2009
Terrific introduction to these two thinkers. Some of my notes:
Both Derrida and Merleau-Ponty attack metaphysics that propose a pure, ideal presence that is then corrupted by language and culture and whatever else. They reject the existence of this unattainable ideal place and the duality between the corrupted and the uncorrupted parts of existence.
This could be called a phenomenological reduction.
Despite our inability to form a thesis about it, MP points out that there is a "lived certitude" to life.
The willingness to predict the future with confidence is often confused with competence at predicting the future. To prevent the tragedies that usually accompany messianic predictions of the future (killing for the sake of progress), Derrida is careful to deconstruct discourses that do predict the future.
"'ethical' behavior... is a product of deferring, and of being forever open to possibilities rather than taking definitive positions.
Lévinas criticizes Merleaux Ponty for claiming that human intersubjectivity involves 'an unaccountable affection'. But this is quite the point of another book in my collection The Consilient Brain. We are set up biologically to have the unaccountable affection.
My favorite part of this book came at the beginning where he describes Merlaux Ponty's experiment differentiating subject and object. Start touching something with one hand, like a glass or a sweater, then touch that hand with your other hand. Now, is that first hand touching or being touched or is it impossible to make that differentiation or does it flip back and forth. Seems like it can't do both at once. I think sex is the ultimate intersection in the impossibility of differentiating between subject and object.
Both Derrida and Merleau-Ponty attack metaphysics that propose a pure, ideal presence that is then corrupted by language and culture and whatever else. They reject the existence of this unattainable ideal place and the duality between the corrupted and the uncorrupted parts of existence.
This could be called a phenomenological reduction.
Despite our inability to form a thesis about it, MP points out that there is a "lived certitude" to life.
The willingness to predict the future with confidence is often confused with competence at predicting the future. To prevent the tragedies that usually accompany messianic predictions of the future (killing for the sake of progress), Derrida is careful to deconstruct discourses that do predict the future.
"'ethical' behavior... is a product of deferring, and of being forever open to possibilities rather than taking definitive positions.
Lévinas criticizes Merleaux Ponty for claiming that human intersubjectivity involves 'an unaccountable affection'. But this is quite the point of another book in my collection The Consilient Brain. We are set up biologically to have the unaccountable affection.
My favorite part of this book came at the beginning where he describes Merlaux Ponty's experiment differentiating subject and object. Start touching something with one hand, like a glass or a sweater, then touch that hand with your other hand. Now, is that first hand touching or being touched or is it impossible to make that differentiation or does it flip back and forth. Seems like it can't do both at once. I think sex is the ultimate intersection in the impossibility of differentiating between subject and object.
April 7, 2011
This book provides a very reasonable discussion of one of the most (read: Few) reasonable phenomenologists: Merleau-Ponty. Reynolds' passion for M-P is obvious, and it comes through to the reader, making it a great and informative read :)
Once again, I didn't finish the whole thing, focusing on the second half, to do with The Other.
Once again, I didn't finish the whole thing, focusing on the second half, to do with The Other.
April 10, 2012
if you like this review i now have website: www.michaelkamakana.com
220412: i need to read more derrida to accurately judge this work, though i have probably read enough merleau-ponty. i remain a convinced m-p phenomenologist however interesting is deconstruction. it is interesting.
220412: i need to read more derrida to accurately judge this work, though i have probably read enough merleau-ponty. i remain a convinced m-p phenomenologist however interesting is deconstruction. it is interesting.
January 12, 2009
I love this book
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews