Wittgenstein and Derrida

by Henry Staten

"By linking Wittgenstein with Derrida, Staten suggests that the intellectual relevance of deconstruction is wider than the English-speaking public has recognized."— Studies in the Humanities "This work is altogether first rate. It is informative, faithful, rigorous and completely original in its problematization. It is an original theoretical advance which I believe will mark an essential step forward in the field."—Jacques Derrida "Staten has plenty of philosophical acuity and critical sensitivity as well as wide philosophical scholarship, and he writes in a clear, muscular style which illuminates the issues sometimes profoundly without in any way concealing their difficulty and complxity. . . . Wittgenstein and Derrida should be essential reading not only for anyone interested in the current critical debate but also for philosophers."—Bernard Harrison, University of Sussex, England This book examines Aristotle, Kant, and especially Husserl to bring to light Derrida's development of the classical philosophical concepts of form (eidos), verbal formula (logos), the object-in-general, and time. The later work of Wittgenstein is then examined in detail and Wittgenstein's "zigzag" writing in the Philosophical Investigations is interpreted as deconstructive syntax, directed, like Derrida's work, against the dominance of the philosophical concern with the form of an entity. Henry Staten is a professor of English and philosophy at the University of Utah.

Genres: Philosophy

184 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1984

Reviews

[Perrystroika · Rating 5 out of 5]

if you wanted to know something about deconstruction and Derrida's critique of western metaphysics this is the best place to go. certainly I prefer it to Derrida himself who is a really irritating prose stylist. Staten is great on context, placing deconstruction in it place in western intellectual history as a critique of Aristotle's division of eidos from ousia, form from substance. his reading of Wittgenstein is plausible, and probably preferable to the communitarian reading developed by analytic philosophers like kripke. that version of Wittgenstein seems too socially authoritarian for my taste, seeming to reduce all utterances that are not a part of conventionalized social discourse, that do not have a precise delimatable place in a language game as somehow illegitimate.

by contrast, Staten's Wittgenstein emerges as a sort of poet philosopher engaged in reading and interpretation as a kind of esoteric mystical practice. the goal is not to produce a theory, a set of propositions, but to effect a change in sensibility, an expanded awareness of the world's ineffable mystery. this is the Wittgenstein beloved of artists.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is certainly not intuitive to identify Wittgenstein as engaged in the project of deconstruction. Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations precedes Derrida's first philosophical works by many years. And perhaps it would be more fair to Wittgenstein to write of Derrida’s project of deconstruction as an iteration of the Philosophical Investigations. Nonetheless, Henry Staten makes a convincing argument that the two philosophers share an elective affinity in the strategies they use to test philosophical ideas, language and methodologies to gain new and different insights into how language works. Wittgenstein and Derrida offers a comprehensive analysis of Derrida's strategy of deconstruction which compares favorably to Wittgenstein’s own strategic philosophical approach of testing ideas. The result is an interesting text that explains each philosopher in light of the other which, in turn, illuminates both.

[Paul H. · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've read a lot about deconstruction in general and Derrida in particular, and actually almost wrote my dissertation on Wittgenstein, so I have a reasonably broad basis for comparison --- Staten's book is an astonishing achievement, almost certainly one of the best monographs yet written about either figure.

But don't just take my word for it! Behold the greatest review blurb in the history of review blurbs (from the man himself):

"This work is altogether first rate. It is informative, faithful, rigorous and completely original in its problematization. It is an original theoretical advance which I believe will mark an essential step forward in the field." —Jacques Derrida

[Jordan · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great way to kill two big birds with one slim stone!

[Xochitl Hood · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is how I got into derrida — as clear as it can be