Thanks. I tried in vain to read that bit from Derrida while I read the Phaedrus. Anyway, can I just recommend to your viewers to read that dialogue. It is a beauty, and it demonstrates that whatever Socrates thought about writing, Plato prided himself in being a great writer.
this is very derrida. for plato's stance is to follow Euclidean geometry which is uncontextual. on the other hand, aristotle who is empirical often, sophists and contextual. the only problem is why did plato choose the form of dialogue? (where paticipants are "speaking") perhaps in his time characters were more solid than tracts.
Is this to mean that Plato's supposed subordination of writing is the root cause of all hierarchical binary thinking in the Western world? Or is Derrida merely using this as an example of how such thinking is mistaken and how long it's been entrenched in Western thought?
How odd, what Plato said, when so obviously ppl RESPOND to what they read. Just not TO the writer. But, within. To think. Etc. ....What I read in Plato is not a criticism of writing vs speech but in SOME who have interpreted Plato, a forgetting of the historical context in which he was writing. Think of Neoplatonism. The connection between Neoplatonism and Theurgy. And the extent to which even Plato spoke of "The Mysteries," both of Egypt and of Greece. These people were engaging with what the Greeks called Noesis, the HIgher Mind, vs only the "lower mind." Within a state of the noetic, it IS very hard to write things down, quite literally. To do so and write is hard, can break you away from that noetic state quite easily. You have to sort of be there, in the noetic mindset, receive what you receive, realize and understand what your ealize and understand, and then upon full return to a lower mindstate, write down what you learned RIGHT AWAY. I wonder if this had anything to do with what Plato himself was saying. Socrates describing truth being written onto the soul....well....that's the "noesis" EXACTLY. From there, to write it down is not as easy as it sounds, because we must access that. So yes, speech as another form of writing--- I entirely agree! But that idea, "truth is written on the soul," that Socrates was a practicing pagan (his last words being to tell his servant to sacrifice a cock [rooster, in case anyone's mind is in the gutter] to Asclepius) and the fact that at the very least the neoPlatonists were often practicing theurgists explains this in a way that make it make WAY more sense....IMHO.
Of course babies do not learn language by reading. They learn language by being predisposed to language naturally and by imitation. Heidegger who said language is the house of being would be more accurate. With postmodernism and constructivism it is too easy to become enveloped in the semiotic trace: its own form of logocentrism.
there are writing. there is speech. derrida points out that in everyday there is a causal relation from speech to writing. but causal can only be a prejudice. and the causal need not be.
above reply is not derridarian. because derrida is looking for the source of language. but my thought ends up to "the middle of the road"(real). so i end up there. i say it is social logical the divide of western dichotomy(truth) against of the eastern thought(real). i don't know how this results end.
Does it matter derridas philosophy is the best in terms of simplicity complex abstractions, deleuze is second, heidegger 3rd and greatest husserl is just a weiner, levinas is as well blah blah becoming a fan they say its the best
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
you’re better at explaining this than some of my professors. Seriously keep making these videos you’re great !!
Hi David. Just wanted to drop a comment to say a massive thanks for all the work you do!
Brazilian graduate Student of IR, Last year i began to study by my own philosophy, Love your Vids!!
Have you ever thinked tackling the works of Bourdieu?
Thank you for all the hard work that you do!! :)
i followed your twitter, thank you so much for these videos they are amazing and so useful/ accessible. I wish i found your channel sooner
Thanks. I tried in vain to read that bit from Derrida while I read the Phaedrus. Anyway, can I just recommend to your viewers to read that dialogue. It is a beauty, and it demonstrates that whatever Socrates thought about writing, Plato prided himself in being a great writer.
you did a wonderful job explaining this thank you
Thank you David
thanks so much for this. it was really helpful.
Love this stuff!
I guess Derrida invests a lot on puns/wordplay in this project of Dissemination. Pharmakon is perhaps the most ancient wordplay
Very well explained.❤
A great band too!
Kindly, upload a video on "from Kant to post-Kantian (German)idealism. "
this is very derrida. for plato's stance is to follow Euclidean geometry which is uncontextual. on the other hand, aristotle who is empirical often, sophists and contextual. the only problem is why did plato choose the form of dialogue? (where paticipants are "speaking") perhaps in his time characters were more solid than tracts.
fantastic!
Thankyou😊
So basically writing is a pharmakon?
Is this to mean that Plato's supposed subordination of writing is the root cause of all hierarchical binary thinking in the Western world? Or is Derrida merely using this as an example of how such thinking is mistaken and how long it's been entrenched in Western thought?
Thanku
The phármakon is *poison-medicine* and not poison or medicine (Y. Rinon 375).
nice!
How odd, what Plato said, when so obviously ppl RESPOND to what they read. Just not TO the writer. But, within. To think. Etc. ....What I read in Plato is not a criticism of writing vs speech but in SOME who have interpreted Plato, a forgetting of the historical context in which he was writing. Think of Neoplatonism. The connection between Neoplatonism and Theurgy. And the extent to which even Plato spoke of "The Mysteries," both of Egypt and of Greece. These people were engaging with what the Greeks called Noesis, the HIgher Mind, vs only the "lower mind." Within a state of the noetic, it IS very hard to write things down, quite literally. To do so and write is hard, can break you away from that noetic state quite easily. You have to sort of be there, in the noetic mindset, receive what you receive, realize and understand what your ealize and understand, and then upon full return to a lower mindstate, write down what you learned RIGHT AWAY. I wonder if this had anything to do with what Plato himself was saying. Socrates describing truth being written onto the soul....well....that's the "noesis" EXACTLY. From there, to write it down is not as easy as it sounds, because we must access that. So yes, speech as another form of writing--- I entirely agree! But that idea, "truth is written on the soul," that Socrates was a practicing pagan (his last words being to tell his servant to sacrifice a cock [rooster, in case anyone's mind is in the gutter] to Asclepius) and the fact that at the very least the neoPlatonists were often practicing theurgists explains this in a way that make it make WAY more sense....IMHO.
It looks like you’re crying in the thumbnail 🥺
Of course babies do not learn language by reading. They learn language by being predisposed to language naturally and by imitation. Heidegger who said language is the house of being would be more accurate. With postmodernism and constructivism it is too easy to become enveloped in the semiotic trace: its own form of logocentrism.
there are writing. there is speech. derrida points out that in everyday there is a causal relation from speech to writing. but causal can only be a prejudice. and the causal need not be.
above reply is not derridarian. because derrida is looking for the source of language. but my thought ends up to "the middle of the road"(real). so i end up there. i say it is social logical the divide of western dichotomy(truth) against of the eastern thought(real). i don't know how this results end.
Does it matter derridas philosophy is the best in terms of simplicity complex abstractions, deleuze is second, heidegger 3rd and greatest husserl is just a weiner, levinas is as well blah blah becoming a fan they say its the best
You have a cold?
No my f$&#__# apartment is freezing
@@TheoryPhilosophy I forgot how y’all live up north, I am spoiled by Southern California
This is probably the most PC dude in the cosmos.