John Llewelyn

John Llewelyn

Abstract

Matthew Calarco refers to Derrida’s apparently dogmatic “insistence on maintaining the human-animal distinction.” What would it mean to “overcome” this distinction? Can we simply let it go? Derrida’s stance is compared with a certain dogma of Heidegger’s and the bêtise of frontal endorsement or denial of it. Perhaps the distinction between mention and use makes possible a relocation of Derrida’s apparent dogmatism. His reservations over the distinction between mention and use do not prevent his mentioning animals (animaux) in the neologism animot. What does it mean to say that the human-animal distinction is abyssal? United by a common concern, the parties to the debate focused on in this essay (Derrida, Calarco, Har-away, Smuts, Llewelyn) follow different procedures that, however, complement one another.

John Llewelyn

Abstract

Stay! That is to say, either stay with your decision or stay your hand. Demeure: either remain or delay. Morari or moriri: either life or death. The alternation is also a hyphenation, a connection-disconnection, as with that of Judaeo-Christianity and the ethicoreligious. How are these hyphenations construed in Kierkegaard's divergence from Kant and Hegel and in the responses of Derrida and Levinas to Johannes de silentio's story of what happened and did not happen on Mount Moriah? Perfect duties and imperfect duties fall under the responsibility of absolute duty. If the ethical is externally related to natural life, the life that is internal to the ethical is due to another externality, that of responsibility to the absolute other - or God, if you like. Another alternation. Another hyphenation? Or a dash? And would it be a dash that separates justice from love? And is love ever separate from self-love or from narcissisim? What sort of narcissism is exemplifed in Kierkegaard's search for salvation? Meanwhile Abraham waits, and with him or against him but without demur, so do Isaac (or is it Ishmael?), the ram, and a host of hostages, guests, and asylum-seekers, one by one.

John Llewelyn

Abstract

Addressed here are addressing and the address of the here and the there: the direction and indirection of words, whether written or spoken in prayer; but also of pictures, one of them sent to Derrida, one of them an icon presumably destined from God, and a third, the one reproduced on the cover of The Post Card from Socrates to Freud and Beyond, that attends to the difficulty of locating the threshold between the to and the from, perhaps a secular version of the problem of grace—unless that is not a problem but an aporia, wherever the threshold between these has its place. The chance of oversight, επισκoπη, is addressed, and the words Derrida addressed to his friends from the grave.

John Llewelyn

Abstract

Based on Merleau-Ponty's description of nature as that on which we ultimately rely, this essay cultivates the thought that this description also fits an idea of God and therefore of Deus sive Natura. Guided by an outline for a phenomenology of climbing, it is argued that what Heidegger calls readiness to hand presupposes readiness-to-foot (Zufussenheit). The latter gives ground for gratitude not only because it gives ground for enjoyment as gratification, but because it also gives ground for joy understood as a grace, grace understood as having its ground in Natura.

John Llewelyn

Abstract

What demands must be met for phenomenology to be the rigorous science Husserl projected? Janicaud complains that some French phenomenologists, while pretending to observe these demands, play fast and loose with them when they apply phenomenology to matters of theology: Derrida, Marion, and Levinas; methodological phenomenology and Henry's phenomenology of the Christian Way. Derrida's deconstructions of the oppositions of immanence and transcendence and of the factual and the transcendental suggest that the rift between him and Henry is not as deep as it must at first seem. Analogical appresentation is a motive of the theological turn.