Locke believed that ideas are the immediate objects of all thought, the meaning or signification of all words, and the mental representatives of all things. However, Locke questioned where we got all of the ideas which created the content of our knowledge. We decided in class that we thought that Locke would side with those believing that the idea preceded the word, however you still could say that you need the word or sign to express that idea. I would question how Derrida would approach this issue. A deconstructive view would seem to assert that words only refer to other words, so the word wouldn't properly represent the idea. What unit of language would Darrida say carries meaning?
1 comment:
I feel that Derrida would side with the idea that the word itself carries meaning. I say this because he made it clear the difference between differance and difference can only be seen and not heard. This concept goes with the idea that ideas supersedes the meaning. If we were to just hear the word we would clearly think of the word as just meaning to differ between to different objects, but once you read it and see that the word is not what you think then you understand the meaning of the word. I had trouble understanding everything that Derrida threw at us in his essay so take my comment with a grain of salt.
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.