Menu
Reading Jacques Derrida's deconstruction of this econo-onto-thanatology,. And the gift with death, in order to think anew – in the spirit of Derrida – a. Derrida begins by analysing an all too familiar phenomenon, namely trembling, which originates from a mysterious and unknowable alterity. Affirming singularity and solitude via mysterium tremendum, he then investigates the notions of sacrifice.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to establish a proper context for reading Jacques Derrida's The Gift of Death, which, I contend, can only be understood fully against the backdrop of 'Violence and Metaphysics.' The later work cannot be fully understood unless the reader appreciates the fact that Derrida returns to 'a certain Abraham' not only in the name of Kierkegaard but also in the name of Levinas himself. The hypothesis of the reading that follows therefore would be that Derrida writes The Gift of Death not as an attempt to re-present Kierkegaard's Abraham either rightly or wrongly but as an effort to do with Kierkegaard's Abraham what is possible with his thought in a broadly Levinasian/Derridean framework. That the reading he provides of the Abraham story would not be recognizable to Kierkegaard is not the principal point of Derrida's effort; his aim is to demonstrate that Levinas should not have been so hasty to dismiss Kierkegaard but could have recovered his interpretation of Abraham for purposes that Derrida and Levinas both share.
- Arroyo C. (2005) Unselfish salvation: Levinas, Kierkegaard, and the place of self-fulfillment in ethics. Faith and Philosophy 22.2: 160–172Google Scholar
- Derrida, J. (1978). Violence and metaphysics. Writing and difference (A. Bass, Trans.) (pp. 79–153; 111). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Derrida J. (1992) How to avoid speaking: Denials. In: Coward H., Foshay T. (eds) Derrida and negative theology. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
- Derrida J. (1994) Given time I: Counterfeit money (P. Kamuf, Trans.). Chicago, University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
- Derrida J. (1996) The gift of death (D. Wills, Trans.). The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- Derrida J. (2002) Force of law: The ‘mystical foundation of authority’. In: Anidjar G. (eds) Acts of religion. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- De Vries H. (1999) Philosophy and the turn to religion. The Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
- De Vries H. (2002) Religion and violence: Philosophical perspectives from Kant to Derrida. The Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
- Gasché R. (2007) European memories: Jan Patocka and Jacques Derrida on responsibility. Critical Inquiry 33: 291–311 305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Goiocoechea D. (1999) The moment of responsibility (Derrida and Kierkegaard). Philosophy Today 43.4: 210–225Google Scholar
- Hanson, J. (Forthcoming). At the limits of religion without religion: A problem that cannot be resolved. Philosophy Today.Google Scholar
- Larrea A. (2007) Anxious responsibility: Derrida’s appropriation of Kierkegaardian ‘fear and trembling’. In: Sharpe M., Noonan M., Freddi J. (eds) Trauma, history, philosophy: With feature essays by Agnes Heller and György Márkus. Newcastle, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp 76–101Google Scholar
- Levinas E. (1998) Otherwise than being or beyond essence (A. Lingis, Trans.). Duquesne University Press, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
- Lippitt J. (2003) Routledge philosophy guidebook to Kierkegaard and Fear and Trembling. Routledge, New York, pp 135–137Google Scholar
- Milbank J. (1995) Can a gift be given? Prolegomena to a future trinitarian metaphysic. Modern Theology 11.1: 119–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Milbank J. (1999) The ethics of self-sacrifice. First Things 91: 33–38Google Scholar
- Turner D. (1998) The art of unknowing: Negative theology in late medieval mysticism. Modern Theology 14.4: 473–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Westphal M. (2008) Levinas and Kierkegaard in dialogue. Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
- Wood D. (1997) Much obliged. Philosophy Today 41.2: 135–140Google Scholar