Fenomenologijos prielaidų kritika: Jacques o Derrida argumentai

LTŠio straipsnio intencija - siekis diskutuoti apie fenomenologijos projekto prielaidas. Manytina, kad Derrida diskusija su fenomenologija remiasi tokiu diskusijos pobūdžiu, kuriam pritariame ir šiame straipsnyje - diskutuojame ne dėl fenomenologijos atmetimo, paneigimo, nepakankamumo nurodymo, „teisingesnio požiūrio apie fenomenologiją pasiūlymo“, bet siekiama diskutuoti apie fenomenologinio projekto unikalumą, taigi ir jo ribotumą, bei šio mąstymo projekto vietą filosofinėje tradicijoje. Viena iš pagrindinių straipsnio minčių yra ta, kad tokios diskusijos metu pati fenomenologinė tradicija gali būti „apvalyta“, nuo dvigubo mintinio išglebimo trajektorijų, kurias, kaip nefilosofines, dar 1919 m., patirdamas didžiulę savo mokytojo Edmundo Husserlio įtaką, asistentas Martinas Heideggeris paskaitų kurse "Zur Bestimmung der Philosophie" siekė atmesti: 1) filosofijos kildinimas iš pasaulėžiūros ir tapatinimas su ja - paprasčiausios nuomonės (doxa) pagrindu plėtojamų nuostatų pašalinimas iš filosofinio diskurso; 2) atmesti filosofijos, kaip pernelyg specifinio ir siauro techninio kalbėjimo, supratimą - t. y. pašalinti filosofijos tapatinimą su pernelyg siauromis mokslinės diferenciacijos sritimis, suponuojantį, kad tokia prieiga yra vienintelė filosofuojančiojo galimybė [p. 111].

ENThis article tries to reconstruct french philosopher Jacques Derrida’s criticism of phenomenological philosophy. This aspiration of reconstruction assembles the two problematic aspects of fulfilment of this aspiration: a) author seeks to introduce the critical statements of Derrida, which are attributed for thought of the founder of phenomenology Edmund Husserl (his “philosophical project” at the same time is considered as the motives, which bases the whole phenomenology); b) the movement of Derrida’s thought are interpreted by author. The key thesis of Derrida, which can be considered as concentrated expression of all-encompassing criticism, - “Phenomenology - the profound metaphysics”. Aspiration of this article is realised through discussion of three accesses. At first, the aspect of genesis of phenomenological philosophy is presented, and then her structure is discussed. These two moments reveals the aspiration of phenomenological philosophy to describe situation till articulation of signification with the supposition, that this kind of condition is aspiration of maximal pure meaning. Moment of thought, which is related with motive of describing, is disclosed as one who have the metaphysical assumption, because he raises factuality - the layer of the language inside him is eliminated.Further the assumption of factuality is articulated with purpose to find out the kind of nature of this factuality. Here attention focuses on Husserl’s research about dual use of sign (Zeichen), when sign is used as expression (Ausdruck) and indication (Anzeichen). Here emerges problematic consequences of the difference of meaning (Sinn) and signification (Bedeutung). Also here is stated the problematic vector of thought, which is tagged with the concept of “voice”, introduced by Derrida, and in the phenomenological philosophy is detected the objection, with purpose to attach the field of idealness to the Inner “I”, which is “cleaned” from certain aspect of language, which is related with sign. The third aspect of discussed problems is related to the Derrida’s concept “vouloir dire” (wanting to say), which is expression of presence as “principle” of metaphysics’principle. The possibility to see phenomenology as “the purest” metaphysics is based on assumption of presence, elimination of sign as non-presence, teleological condition of meaning and methodological structure.