Binary on which the speech-over-writing ranking rests; Derrida argues language is driven more by absence and that presence is an illusion.
In lecture order, as Marci Shore presents each view. The time opens that minute of the lecture on YouTube.
From the ancient Greeks through Saussure, Western metaphysics has favored speech over writing: a speaking self seems immediately there, offering a window onto inner consciousness that writing lacks.
Put simply Derrida: since the ancient Greeks, Western thinkers have ranked speech above writing. A speaker seems to be right there, giving a direct view into their mind, while writing seems one step removed.
Speech cannot guarantee presence, because the one speaking is not necessarily present even to himself; so presence versus absence, like speech versus writing, is a binary to be dismantled.
Put simply Derrida: speaking does not prove that someone is truly "present", because the speaker is not fully present even to himself. So presence versus absence, like speech versus writing, is a contrast to be taken apart.
Any given sign draws its meaning from the signifiers it is not, which are absent; so language turns on absence more than on presence.
Put simply Derrida: a word gets its meaning from all the words it is not ("cat" is not "bat" or "hat"), and those are absent. So language depends more on what is missing than on what is there.
Links from these claims to others in the course. Each shows the earlier claim, then the later one that answers it. “Our inference” marks a link Shore does not state outright.
Lévi-StraussAs Derrida reads him, Lévi-Strauss holds that writing reached the societies he studied as a corruption: hierarchy, control and even violence came with it, and an innocence was lost. L22 · 20:25
DerridaSpeech cannot guarantee presence, because the one speaking is not necessarily present even to himself; so presence versus absence, like speech versus writing, is a binary to be dismantled. L22 · 22:10
Derrida takes apart Levi-Strauss's speech/writing binary, denying that speech guarantees presence.
FreudWe can never fully know ourselves: what is most basic in us sits in the unconscious, so the self stays opaque to itself and permanently at odds with itself. L9 · 48:02
DerridaSpeech cannot guarantee presence, because the one speaking is not necessarily present even to himself; so presence versus absence, like speech versus writing, is a binary to be dismantled. L22 · 22:10
Shore points to Freud in Derrida's claim that the speaking self is not present to itself: the self is hidden from the self.
SaussureNothing natural or God-given ties a signifier to its signified: the word dog refers to dogs only by differing from cat and hog, and by sheer convention. L10 · 20:22
DerridaAny given sign draws its meaning from the signifiers it is not, which are absent; so language turns on absence more than on presence. L22 · 22:36
If meaning comes from differences, it depends more on what is absent than presentOur inference
Throughlines that pass through one of these claims.
Terms that appear in the same claims.