Understanding Derrida, Deconstruction & Of Grammatology

[@HahnenschreidesPositivismus]

I wouldn't comment on a video if I wouldn't notice the distinct lack of comments, while being a big fan of the channel. I love what you do and your videos are really good at explaining philosophical concepts over a relaxing tune playing, helping me stay focused. I believe you touch just the right topics that other thoughtful youtube channels haven't tapped into yet. Take it as a compliment: Then & Now is what The School of Life should be.

[@ThenNow]

Thank you, that's really appreciated. Comments like this help me keep going. I certainly feel frustration at The School of Life's lack of a depth sometimes.

[@oalivo]

agreed

[@HahnenschreidesPositivismus]

Not just lack of depth, even though that is painful to look at, it's also that sometimes he is straight up wrong. Also he claims to present an unbiased view but he is clearly shaping other concepts to fit his ideology. He also tries to make everything about enlightening self-help and shit. Why did I open this can of worms?

[@ThenNow]

Admittedly, I haven't watched much of the newer stuff he's done so I can't say this with much conviction, but I do applaud the idea of making philosophy more approachable and applicable to our everyday lives. But I agree completely that you can't claim to be unbiased while doing it. I try to be balanced when I approach a topic, but I do have a political bias which I would never try to hide. But I will try, when I want make an overtly political video, to express my political views in a way that acknowledges there are two sides to an argument. I try to be Hegelian about these things! Anyway, I am still working out the modus operandi of this channel so all these comments are really welcome! Thanks again

[@smartzeusy]

I concur with Jean Kirstein, even as far as The School of Life is concerned. The video was very well done. Thank you.

[@languagelearningbyreading2903]

What I liked best is the lower pace of speech that enabled me to grasp most of the aspects mentioned. This is such a wonderful summary! Thank you!

[@ILoveMagic15]

This has to be the best introduction to Derrida I've ever seen. Amazing production quality, clear and concise explanations of the central concepts, and very helpful graphics. Your channel really deserves to become huge. I'm looking forward to watching your other videos.

[@scriabinismydog2439]

Dude your profile pic

[@ILoveMagic15]

@@scriabinismydog2439 You didn't expect your dog to be watching Derrida videos, did you?

[@scriabinismydog2439]

@@ILoveMagic15 absolutely not. He must've taken from the owner

[@cavedon.felipe]

This video is still one of the greatest gifts someone interested in the more modern thinkers may have. In a sense, you can can split your understanding of language before and after Derrida and this is the best introduction you can have. Thank you, mate. Your work is incredible!

[@levirose6883]

6:55

[@levirose6883]

17:15

[@subalternprecariat821]

I really appreciate the amount of work put into this video. The graphics and film montages had really made the philosophical concepts accessible to viewers and understandable. Always wanted to get my head around Derrida. Thank you for giving me a foothold and I'm sure the same sentiment is felt by other viewers.

[@mitchclark1532]

It sure is 🙂

[@jamespotts8197]

This video is, in a large part responsible for the "basic understanding" of Derrida's philosophical concepts, theories and the amazingly insightful, reality changing concept of Deconstruction, and has afforded me an opportunity to increase my conceptualizations of my reality, and or realities. Fantastic video! Thank You! Keep pushing forward!

[@the_whetherman]

I took classes under a professor whose PhD advisor was Derrida (at Ecole Normal Superior, I believe). He says that on the day he had to defend his dissertation, Derrida instead decided to use the event as an opportunity to deconstruct his student/my professor. The professor still seemed traumatized by the experience when he recalled it to us. He has become an accomplished philosopher in his own right, as an expert on Heidegger, Dasein, etc. - taking his classes was one of the highlights of my college experience.

[@Elisakr2024]

What Derrida did to his own student is a trend between professors in universities nowadays. I've seen it happening. Misconduct.

[@DaveE99]

How did he deconstruct him

[@VioletDeliriums]

@@DaveE99 presumably by revealing the binaries within the language in his dissertation, and thus his hidden value system.

[@Joakimfrank]

Really great work with this one. Honest, calm, well tought-out artwork, great quotes, deep enough. Quite superb actually. Thanks.

[@ThenNow]

Thank you!

[@subliminal81]

@@ThenNow You help a lot on the field of Enlightenment for other-fellow living beings.It's the greatest thing what You can do. Thank You. Best wishes. Bless.

[@dipro001]

You described what I paid a college professor thousands of dollars to teach me for free! This is fairy accurate and touches almost all main points. Videos like this are why i love KZbin based education. Please do another one maybe for those who have read a few of Darrida's texts, maybe?

[@ThenNow]

Thank you! I would like to do one the purloined letter at some point.

[@dipro001]

Please do. I sincerely dream of a world where open platforms like KZbin will have greater and more accessible wisdom than Jstore. I would also recommend advanced lectures which ask audiences to do some readings first. I know that might reduce popularity, but i do not think one experimental attempt will not hurt. PS: To gain better recognition and acceptance, i would recommend thoroughly citing ALL the information you present. It will make academics more comfortable spending their time behind your content and not feel like they are wasting any. One of the biggest complains i will hear from Professors about online education is how ill-cited they are. Just turn the comment section into a bibliography and provide links at the span of seconds you mention the information in the video.

[@Kevin-zv6ds]

To be fair if you scour the internet, you can find sources & writings on anything.

[@Dummy257]

You didn't pay him. You paid the institution.

[@lstarrtna4288]

Yes it's like that

[@honey3762]

your visuals here really help here instead of distract like so many other videos I've seen on this site, wonderful work here

[@martm216]

Very clear and accessible. I liked the moderate to slow pace of it, being pretty slow myself. I am not in general a great fan of background music, but the music here was an exception. I found it relaxing and inobtrusive. More of these please!

[@gustavoalvarez281]

Videos like those should be considered as valid bibliography for thesis and academic research !! After a week trying to understand Derida's philosphy for my thesis framework, I end up watching this and matching all my thoughts. THANK YOU from Spain!

[@bryannoonan5454]

The music is nice, it's not distracting at all, and actually helps me focus on the words oddly. I'm curious why there is so much disdain?

[@roccofazzalari906]

Currently writing a thesis on Derrida, and his theory- your video does a great job explaining Derrida’s philosophy, and I couldn’t agree more with your stance on archi-writing, as one who has already read grammatology- this video serves as a wonderful introductory step for those who are either curious about deconstruction, or literary criticism as a whole! Wonderful video. :)

[@rohxn6988]

Did you finish it?

[@wengelder9256]

I suggest to read his books , as difficult as it may be , and forget this simplification

[@adaptercrash]

Currently; writing a thesis on Derrida, his theory; however, serves as a foundation for this video, which demonstrates a metaphysical presence in the mind of the other for a desiring form of meaning that is obfuscated by grammar that diverges concepts into hyphenated forms of interpretation. Does it matter?

[@antarapatel8250]

hello, i am an undergrad eng major, and derrida's a part of our intro to literary theory paper. this video was incredibly helpful, and thought provoking. the video clips that you chose to supplement the text with really brought me to newer ideas that will be immensely rewarding in my reading, of derrida and otherwise. i am so happy that your channel exists! best of luck with everything. hope you have a wonderful day.

[@hashirkp6477]

footprintsofliterature.blogspot.com/2020/07/deconstruction-easy-handout-for.html?m=1

[@Samwise_Gamgee]

Thank you, I was getting clumsy with Derrida's theories this video gave me crisp points and it touches everywhere as well..

[@middayz]

That's a very clear introduction to a methodology of reading which should be the normal way of doing it, in order not to be deceived in politics, religion, etc... It's the real deal. Thanks.

[@mikepeters4052]

what an amazing video! as someone new to derrida, this begins to explain the basic premise of his ideas. Thank you

[@MichaelJimenez416]

If anyone wants to know more about what Derrida means by a sign / trace, definitely check out some Levinas!

[@guygeorgesvoet4177]

never did this before, but here i have to make an exception, and congratelate the author of the videos in here and Now, for the outstanding pedagogical quality of his work and thank him for it:

[@KravMagoo]

A simple observation: both speaking and writing have pros and cons. Conversations "theoretically" allow for a vigorous trade of back-and-forth that provides participants the opportunity to hone in on a particular point and make sure they are "on the same page". But I find that quite often there are all manner of breaks in conversation that occur, which end up derailing the flow of discussion and lead to very little actual "progress" in the process of communication. Writing, on the other hand, while it doesn't allow for "receiver" interruptions for the sake of gaining clarity, for that very reason also provides a vehicle for presenting extended coherent material without interruption. Both are necessary, imo, as both together contribute to a fuller exchange of ideas.

[@allmendoubt4784]

Yes writing is tyranny.

[@DonnaSnyder]

You make complex thought clear without becoming simplistic. Thank you.

[@francisfishing4913]

Explained this way better than my college prof, with such thoughtfulness too

[@stephenperez5138]

Thank you for your time and effort. Your summation has been proven helpful to those that struggle with Derrida and Deconstruction. Cheers.

[@lexnight]

Oh, god yes, thank you for this succinct introduction to Derrida - his work sounds like it is of... deep personal relevance to myself, and I look forward to circulating this video to others as well.

[@mileymartha6515]

This is by far the best explanation of Derrida I have come across and the only one that actually helps me understand his books. You have a real talent. Thank you so much for sharing this.

[@DonnaSnyder]

Agreed

[@litup1090]

Thanks for these videos, very helpful for an English Major to grasp the concepts of Deconstruction and more. It's also nice to get the full history on these theories.

[@ThenNow]

You're welcome :)

[@demilad225]

THANK YOU. WE'RE READING OF GRAMMATOLOGY FOR MY CLASS AND I COULDN'T MAKE HEADS OR TAILS OF WHAT WAS HAPPENING.

[@codacreator6162]

That's how everyone comes to Derrida, initially. Keep going, you'll get it.

[@mgsfan2023]

I really appreciate what you're doing. Thank you for your efforts. Do not give up.

[@ThenNow]

Thank you, it's appreciated!

[@returndates7166]

THANK YOU. YOU JUST SAVED MY LIFE FOR MY THEORY FINAL EXAM.

[@macnamara60]

very good. A lot of info was packed into this short video, which I listened to 3 times. Will share.

[@dariuszjanczewski2475]

Very helpful to grasp the main veins of the philosophy and the way of looking at it. Thank you!

[@CA55IU5]

Very good video, thanks for this I’m reading a book about Giorgio Agamben and he is deeply connected to Derrida. I love your videos.

[@thomsencummings8471]

> "inspired by the writings of ONE MAN" > shows a book written by two men

[@qazaqstanmann]

@jay Or are they pinions in the s t r u c t u r e s ? /music plays

[@kendrakrust1244]

@@qazaqstanmann Stalin is the one. Our glorious leader ❤️.

[@Mybrainisgrowing]

I was doing homework--or avoiding it by tearing apart the kitchen and your videos seem to help with a deeper understanding of material I don't grok well. The kids being the helpful souls that they are, were moving their body parts as if they were indeed moving towards successful "of course we are working" motions, until your video came up. Auto-play being what it is.... Thanks for being something even an 8 year old who doesn't pay attention to much, enjoyed along with her 10 year old sister, though I spent the next hour or so on my own.

[@LiteratureInsights]

It's really good explanation of deconstruction of Jacques Derrida using pictures and videos...

[@gen2917]

Very interesting and clearly expressed!. Interesting how both philosophers relied on both SPEECH and WRITING ✍️ in order to relay their message, and as profound as it sounds, their worldview can easily lead to chaos.

[@ricardobelisario9772]

This was a phenomenal introduction. Clear, including the necessary context, and interesting.

[@OneHandClap]

Damn so glad I found this video. Always a shock to see such high quality channels at such low subscriber numbers. Keep at this, man. You're doing some really incredible work and i think it's genuinely important to have this kind of content in the pantheon of ~content~

[@rob5541]

Very informative, clearly presented, and well designed video. Thank you.

[@LatinxMatt]

Bro... this is such a great introduction to so many difficult concepts, but you make it very easy to understand. Great work.

[@JoTokutora]

Interesting individual. I do not agree with his thinking but interesting how the human mind can reach different understanding of what value is on all world aspects

[@aviewerman]

I am an Mphil in Comparative Literature and I approve your message!

[@derbucherwurm]

Interesting Video I struggled a lot going in this Derridian way of philosophy. This video is very helpful to understand his way of thinking.

[@DarkAngelEU]

Excellent video on Derrida! Many of the things my brother talked about to me during his Uni education came back in this video, bravo :D

[@miniscusapogee9129]

Jordan Peterson is where I stumbled across this Post Modernist philosopher. Over discord, I heard the name that one said my ideas reminded him of, and to continue, this is where I am, questioning life, deconstruction, language, and the interpersonal.

[@gadda01]

Beautifully described, you certainly have a poetic flow to your video and still manage to be concise

[@ThenNow]

Thank you :)

[@moe081997]

Masterpiece! More of these please. Peace and love from Indonesia.

[@bato4531]

Thank you so much for actually making Derrida intelligible.

[@dadedraak]

The soothing music really made this video a joy to watch, thank you!

[@ashokkaul4740]

Quite impressive and fundamental.would love to have more details.

[@Celestial-Pickle]

Thank you for the upload :). This is a great exposition on Derrida and the importance of his work! The graphics add a great deal of clarity, and it’s a brilliant and concise way of explaining ideas that are notoriously abstract and hard to define.

[@tameshewolf]

Thank you for your videos! Especially thank you for your reading suggestion on "introducing Derrida, a graphic guide". It really clarified things well!! Thank you again! :))

[@TheJudgeandtheJury]

This is a great channel with well produced videos. Keep up the great work.

[@tehreemzahrakhan1743]

Super helpful! Thank you for making such an informative video on Derrida

[@carolinaypunto]

What a wonderful explanation and quality content! It's really helpful

[@MungareMike]

You, sir, the real MVP!

[@FIGSANE]

This video was rewarding. I'm thirsting for one of those books.

[@philipnikolayev987]

I love the distinctly postmodernist argument that while postmodernist writing is, "on the surface," forbiddingly and pretentiously abstruse, at a deep level it embodies nothing but a body of simple truisms of common sense (e.g. "power relies on rhetoric," "institutions use language") that everybody already knew anyway.

[@nomaddd123]

Great content, refreshing take on Derrida. Inspired.

[@OanhNguyen-wi8yp]

love your voice! Can listen to you for hours really!! Keep up the good work

[@MrUsaOliver]

just amazing work you do!

[@a.beguile23]

Great video and well explained concepts. Well done 👏

[@newcivilisation]

Terry Eagleton's An Introduction to Literary Theory is good on this subject. c 9:00, I think there is a critique of this issue of binaries, said to derive from Greek thought. It's important to remember that what is being discussed is thinking in the West. It's helpful to compare 'Western' thinking with that of other traditions (e.g. Japanese), in order to get more clarity on how our thinking is shaped. c. 10:30, the Malian scholar, Tierno Bokar, said that 'writing is the photograph of knowledge.' c. 11:30 You have a picture of Chinese men writing, but calligraphy is quite different from writing in Roman letters. Calligraphy is a medium that allows for a massive range of expression - although artistic, pictorial expression, not verbal.

[@Badbentham]

Thanks for explaining Derrida`s basic conceptualization of language in a condensed and easily digestible way! Alas, I believe language consists of two different "areas" : Concepts and meaning ( leading to interpretation and hermeneutics). The greek deities would represent concepts, while the jewish/christian/islamic god ("in the beginning, there was the word...") is the source of ("unscientific") meaning. While the Greeks were extremely extrospective, visible even in their architecture, trying to discover the patterns of nature, monotheism is introspective, focussing on "the unseen".A concept would be: The moon moves around the Earth. Or: Ancient armies protected their country against invaders. Or: The binary code. In general, most classic philosophers mainly talked about concepts, either "behind" or "in" reality, starting with Platon`s idealistic speculation that concepts (the highest would be "the God of Reason") come before reality, up to e.g. Hegel`s concept of historic dynamics. Marxists would claim that the concept behind capitalism does not work.Analytic philosophy even tried to condense all language to concepts, to support conceptual science, and failed in consequence to inconclusive natural language. No wonder that Chomsky ( a very conceptual thinker, also famous for his tries in "universal language") does not understand Derrida, and that many analytic philosophers that did not follow Wittgenstein`s linguistic turn ( after his "book with the seven seals", aka "Tractatus (theo)logico philosophicus" and breaking with the Vienna circle), are disinclined of Derrida`s associative linguistic games. The -relative- "weakness" of Derrida`s precise immanent critique of (philosophic) literature is that these texts are not only designed for interpretation, and can thus be " read against themself", as championed by him, but often are intended to grasp empiric "facts", leading to the accusation of relativism against him . One of the many reasons why Derrida ( apart from e.g. the totalitarian approach of the PCF after WW2) never got too warm with Marx. Also, it could be assumed that his focus on writings made him somewhat blind concerning the "real" histories of Paul de Man or Heidegger.

[@armandvista]

Great Video! This channel always produces great content, takes lots of skills and hard work edit and make this stuff! For the sake of learning, I'm going to try to form some propositions (in summary) from what I gathered about Derrida and my personal criticisms. (If anyone has anything to comment, please do so.) It seems as though Derrida is noticing the distinction of the symbol/symbolized (I find this language easier to use that signifier and signified), and just taking language to its logical conclusion. That since propositional truths, such as all bachelors are unmarried, are true only given the conventional meanings of the words "bachelors" and "unmarried" (and of course all the other words), that truth can be manipulated. And deconstruction is merely the explication of the meanings of the words within the definition of the words, and the infinte regress that follows it. Obviously, there is no objective reference point for the meanings of words. This is self-evident. The reference point we use for words, is a conventional one, as a means to an end - to relay the meaning we are trying to communicate. Derrida and the postmodernists seem to think that the meaning, is entirely found in the reader of the words, not the writer of the words. This I just cannot accept. Because if it is the case, then why does Derrida think before using words? Or try to use the right words? You cannot escape making truth claims either, as the conclusion that we have no epistemological access to objective knowledge, is predicated on the premises that led to the conclusion... to be true. Just my 2 cents, I always find it much easier to think, remember, and understand what I learn when I write or comment about it. Great video!

[@ltw6888]

The geometry of the illustrations accompanying the narration is fascinating. I see naturally occurring forms constantly emerging from the philosophy. Is everything really just math?

[@dsnutt1]

This is the best video I have found explaining Derrida's thought

[@ThenNow]

Thank you! I'm glad you like it :)

[@quagapp]

I've read a lot about Derrida and watched KZbins but read nothing. But I knew he discussed Rousseau and was influenced by such as Heidegger. Meanwhile I decided to read Wittgenstein's Tractatus which isn't difficult as people think. Then I read Rousseau's 'Social Contract' which is interesting but has some dubious claims like Plato's 'Republic'. Plato is a good start in Philosophy. One commentator I read pointed out that Derrida respected all the philosophers and writers he read. His deconstruction was aimed at opening up the text so to speak. Re language, Wittgenstein wrestles with it and I think it was Hegel who thought any system depended on a total system. That idea is inherent in the idea of Derrida that there has to be a language existence for writing or speech. Plato is also critiqued in his concept of speech being immediate, and also in his concept of a "pure' thing. I have no issue with Nihilism. But in the end we have to realise all writing is a kind of rhetoric and we are always in an area of knowledge that is subject to probabilities. In logic Truth can only be absolute. But that isn't Plato's truth or that of the Logos, it is something quite simply unavoidable as it is defined by that. It is always tautological. But knowledge of something is not so. This is subject to test and also acceptance -- and also in establishing it we are inside this language net that Wittgenstein and Derrida et al were aware of. So we take a punt so to speak. Absolute scepticism is not much use to us: we would do nothing.

[@squidinkart]

Great video and great site. Thank you for breaking down Deconstruction

[@yzyzyz44]

This video is in all aspects very well-made

[@MrChristK]

Wow, amazing job on both the explanation and the editing!

[@craigdellapenna7103]

Very nice. Thank you for making my points....

[@LordPowerful7]

I have stumbled upon this channel looking for the person who inspired "Martin Heidegger" and more clarity pertaining to his landmark book {Being and Time (1927}. So far, this video tied up many loose ends and I will be following your future work. Thanks so much... :)

[@raymondkasar7167]

Can u do a video on Hannah Arendt?

[@saulorocha3755]

Beautifully told video-story.

[@learningwithharry4996]

This is incredibly helpful. Thank you!

[@atrixhd4ss]

i have learned so much from your channel. thank you.

[@kakistocracyusa]

This narrator reminds me of my room-mate decades ago in grad school (he was Comp. Lit.) who spoke in the same unending sequence of expansive metaphors and language about any particular philosophical/literary work with little if any specific converging insight or thesis. After some years I realized that this lack of any actual convergence around a cogent hypothesis was due to the fact that his reward metric and conditioning was not so much a scholarly one, but rather that of picking up on girls at our local hip/artsy nightclubs (I was his wing-man often enough). In retrospect, I can’t fault him on his priorities.

[@tylerlynch2849]

Fantastic introduction

[@hendricka3029]

I still have trouble understanding "differance" and "trace".

[@luciferangelica4827]

thank you for explaining that, and for the reading list

[@daxciko]

I'm just starting to dive into philosophy, and I have to admit this was tough to grasp at times. Nontheless I thank you for such an amazing explanation, I'm definitely going to binge watch your channel. Keep spreading knowledge my man!

[@ashokkaul4740]

A Wonderful lecture, but needs more elaborations needed on the contesting ideas of the authors mentioned in the lecture

[@emilymatthews8199]

This is an amazingly put together video, concise and with a perfect amount of context for the study of Derrida, thank you for the help!

[@umerasim8307]

great video and production, thanks for making this.

[@gg3675]

If anyone sees this comment, just note that much of how people describe Rousseau (including this video) is a bit caricatured. That’s just life, but don’t assume you really get Rousseau if you haven’t read him.

[@shiflashanga1746]

This is such a well made video

[@modernmyth9050]

"Attacks the values of reason and truth." Based!

[@thotharchitectoftruth8497]

As much as I think Derrida is a sophist, this video is absolutely amazing. Will definitely be checking out the reading list. You deserve many, many times the subscriber base you currently have. Keep it up!!

[@thenowchurch6419]

Thoth. Derrida was not a sophist. He was just provocative, rhetorical and purposefully enigmatic. Most of all he was playful seeing Play as one of the qualities that the Western rational and philosophical traditions had overlooked , to their and our peril. The video was indeed amazing.

[@timmysmith9991]

All criticism is self criticism. Dig yourself. - Stokely Carmichael.

[@boptillyouflop]

@@thenowchurch6419 It was easy for Derrida to be "Playful" considering he had tenure...

[@thenowchurch6419]

@@boptillyouflop True. All play and no work would make Jacques a foolish boy.

[@amanabbas7875]

Great introduction to Derrrida.

[@noThankyou-g5c]

Whenever I listen to these sort of basic explanations I totally understand them but they don't help me understand Derrida's actual writing one bit. I just wish there was some resource that went through any of derrida's texts and explained what he was trying to say. Maybe thats too much to ask of the world.

[@lanceuppercut2013]

C R I guess that is what college is supposed to be for...but who the heck can afford that anymore!?

[@R0DisG0D]

My advice is to just keep reading. After about 300 pages into Of Grammatology I actually started to understand some of the things he writes. Especially his analysis of Rousseau helped me as he really goes into detail there.

[@hd-xc2lz]

Lots of secondary lit out there on Derrida's individual books and essays. Many general intros that proceed book by book.

[@hd-xc2lz]

@300bpm Derrida didn't write on science topics. And sorry, but he's been very influential in the field of philosophy and its many sub fields, continues to be so, and the strict analytic vs continental philosophy divide has long since tattered. You're repeating an invective that dates back to the 1980s. Philosophy moved on.

[@hxgxxd7921]

Start by the text structure, sign and play

[@sabrewolf479]

"Those who are deep strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem deep strive for obscurity." - Nietzsche Has anyone striven more diligently for obscurity and achieved it more spectacularly than Derrida?

[@cankutbayhan]

great vid...and actually about the part saying Derrida denied the possibility of the priority of the sound image to the written word, I think it might be ignoring the import he had emphasized mentioning the intervalic delay between the verbal and the neural accelerations of the meaning...would not claim that he entirely ignored that period of oscillation, resonating into the final structure of the word itself, thinking he would also have it emphasized as a closed set of a complete function he defined as différance itself in a sense.

[@juangiusto]

Dude, awesome video! Congratulations

[@orcasmicyt6423]

THIS video is full of RICH CONTENT, amazing QUOTES

[@pauserepeat787]

0:00 Logocentrism and Totalitarianism 4:00 Structuralism, Trace, Différance 9:20 Rousseau on Speech and Writing 11:42 Criticism of Rousseau through Natural/Unnatural Binary 15:30 "There is no outside text", Deconstruction, Archi-writing

[@brentgould958]

phenomenal job

[@harrissimo]

Good job. This helps me understand.

[@R0DisG0D]

This was a very insightful video. I've also seen your video on Habermas, who had disputes with Derrida before they reconciled later on (though not in philosophical terms, as far as I'm aware). Could you do a video mediating the positions of communicative action and deconstruction? I think that topic is quite fascinating, though I've yet to read into the post-structuralist side of things.

[@ThenNow]

Laclau's critique of Habermas is a good one. The standard poststructural argument against communicative action is that there is no 'rational' centre that we can build agreement around - power of various forms always distorts and dislocates the idea of a perfectly rational argument