论文部分内容阅读
关于德里达与维特根斯坦的比较研究,从斯坦顿到加尔弗和李承宗,都强调德里达和维特根斯坦攻讦形而上学的方法可以互补,换言之,两人分别代表的文学和哲学的方法可以互补。但是,德里达的解构理论究竟在多大程度上可以代表文学的方法,抑或本身是哲学解构之必然?这是值得认真探讨的。维特根斯坦后期以语言游戏替代图式说,以日常语言替代理想语言的哲学思想,与后期德里达的人文建构,可视为殊途同归。
A comparative study of Derrida and Wittgenstein from Stanton to Galfo and Lee Seong-sang emphasized that both Derrida and Wittgenstein can complement each other in their metaphysical metaphysical approach. In other words, the literary and philosophical methods represented by both can complement each other. However, to what extent can Derrida’s theory of deconstruction actually represent the method of literature or is it inevitable that it is deconstructed by philosophy? This is worth studying seriously. Wittgenstein later said in the alternative schema of language games that the philosophical thought of replacing the ideal language with daily language and the humanistic construction of Derrida later can be regarded as the same thing.