deconstruction

[Lorentzen / Nicklaus]

JBFRAME at aol.com schrieb:

> In a message dated 12/12/2000 7:51:45 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
> michael.baum at nist.gov writes:
>
> << What does "deconstruction" mean? >>
> This is something we've been asking ourselves for months now.  It's an 
> attempt to explore how words can say so many different meanings 
> simultaneously.  For example:  LOVE   ( I love you, I love ice cream, love 
> for sale, etc)  HATE  (I hate fascists, I hate scalloped potatoes...)
>
> Of course, this doesn't even scratch the surface

  well, every saying or writing, being basically a construction of meaning, can 
  be "de-constructed", that is traced back to its implicit - and necessarily:   
  contingent - assumptions. no big deal, no reason to found a "school" upon it. 
  but of course jaques d. has read his heidegger, and the famous § 6 of "sein 
  und zeit" [1927] is called "die aufgabe einer destruktion der geschichte der 
  ontologie". and this, as heidegger calls it, "positive" understanding of 
  "destruction" is exactly what comtemporaries mean when they talk about 
  "deconstruction". most of so called "poststructuralism" - note that i'm not 
  talking about foucault and deleuze here - is, actually, 'heidegger light' ...

kfl