THEORETICAL ASPECTS IN THE FORMATION OF
PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
41
ENTERPRETATIVE DECONSTRUCTION STRATEGIES
Ruzimurodova Fariza Dustmurod kizi
Tashkent State University of Uzbek Language
and Literature named after Alisher Navoi
Department of Translation Theory and Practice
2nd year basic doctoral student
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14511925
ANNOTATION
The architectonics of Derrida's work implies that it is devoid of the idea of
linearity and continuity of writing. He says about his works “Writing and
Difference” and “Of Grammatology”: “These things cannot be imagined as easily
as you might think. In any case, the two 'volumes' falling in the middle of each
other, as you can see, resemble a strange geometry that appears contemporary
with these texts...”
Key words:
“On Deconstruction”, Criticism, Poststructuralism,
hierarchical opposition, logocentrism, binary opposition;
1.5. Interpretative strategies
J.Culler in his work “On Deconstruction”: Theory and Criticism of
Poststructuralism” expresses the general purpose of all hermeneutic strategies
of deconstruction as follows: “To deconstruct a discourse is to show how it
undermines the philosophy it asserts, or the hierarchical oppositions on which it
relies, by identifying in the text the rhetorical operations that produce the
supposed ground of argument, the key concept or premise.”
Deconstruction does not aim to prove, reject, or confirm the truth. On the
contrary, all these concepts in deconstruction lie under the sign of erasure as
one of the names of the metaphysics of logocentrism.
Within the framework of deconstructionist hermeneutics, the following
interpretative strategies can be distinguished:
1. The strategy of eliminating binary oppositions - simultaneously eliminating
the tradition of logocentrism;
2. Terminological strategy - deconstructing the terminological apparatus of
metaphysics;
3. The strategy of approaching meaning as a capability;
4. Marginalization strategy;
5. Strategy of graphematic embeddings.
We will consider these strategies sequentially.
7.5.7. Strategy for eliminating binary oppositions
THEORETICAL ASPECTS IN THE FORMATION OF
PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
42
Derrida views the structure of philosophical theory as a game of relationships,
oppositions, and differentiations (differences). Therefore, when interpreting the
theory, it is crucial to first consider the oppositions operating within it.
Accordingly, this strategy involves the explication of binary oppositions that are
traditional in Western metaphysical traditions, such as: speech / writing, male /
female, truth / falsehood, literal meaning / metaphorical, meaningful / symbolic,
and their deconstruction.
In such oppositions in metaphysics, the first (left) term holds a superior status
over the second (right) term, and it is viewed as "the complexity, negation,
manifestation, or downfall of the first." For Derrida, such hierarchical
oppositions constitute the essence of the logocentrism he criticizes.
Deconstruction aims to dismantle these oppositions by equalizing their status
and viewing them as effects of fundamental differentiation. As J.R. Searle notes in
his article "Reversed Word," deconstruction primarily attempts to demonstrate
that the second (right) term is actually fundamental, while the left is a particular
case of the right; the right term is considered the condition of possibility for the
left . Derrida also emphasizes the importance of this approach: "Deconstructing
an opposition means, first and foremost, overturning the hierarchy at a given
moment." Ignoring this stage of reversal would mean overlooking the
contradictory and subordinate structure of the opposition. He clarifies that this
is not about a chronological stage, stating, "The necessity of this phase is
systematic, hence it is a constant necessity of analysis, as the hierarchy of binary
opposition always reconstitutes itself. "
But this is only the first stage. The goal is not to replace the opposition. The main
objective is to completely
eliminate any centralization and destroy the oppositions. For this, it is shown
that the existing metaphysical oppositions are based on a general, but not
metaphysical, concept that has been deconstructed: for example, archi-writing.
J. Culler schematically shows the elements of this strategic process :
(A) demonstrates that the opposition is expressed through metaphysical and
ideological falsehoods, where:
(1) defining its foundations and role in the system of metaphysical meanings is a
task that may require a broad analysis of a certain number of texts
(2) showing how it breaks down in texts that form it and rely on it;
(B) at the same time, the opposition is supported by:
(1) Its use in argumentation (speech and writing or literature and philosophy
are not errors that should be rejected, but the main source of evidence) and
THEORETICAL ASPECTS IN THE FORMATION OF
PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
43
(2) its restoration through complete transformation, which gives it a different
status and impulse.
The elimination of the binary opposition "external / internal" leads to the
violation of the opposition "text / commentary," "text / interpretation," and they
are considered as follows.
1.5.2. Terminological Strategy
Within the framework of the terminological strategy, in turn, several strategies
can be distinguished:
- deconstructive analysis of metaphysical concepts;
- linguistic-comparative analysis of terms;
- analysis independent of specific terms of one philosopher or another;
- Negative distinction strategy;
- an antimetaphysical strategy for self-erasure (crossing out) of the term;
- a strategy for defining key concepts.
Let's examine each of these sub-strategies one by one.
Deconstructive analysis of metaphysical concepts
In his programmatic work "Letter to a Japanese Friend," Derrida emphasizes:
..."the question of deconstruction is also, from beginning to end, the question of
translation and of the language of concepts, of the conceptual corpus of so-called
'Western' metaphysics. " Indeed, the problem of metaphysical deconstruction is
primarily related to criticizing the language of metaphysics within the
framework of the metaphysical deconstruction project.
However, in reality, it is not easy to criticize language: because when we
criticize, we cannot go beyond the boundaries of this language. That is, in
essence, we are in a kind of critical-hermeneutic circle: when criticizing
metaphysical terms, philosophers themselves are forced to use them for
criticism, thereby repeating all of metaphysics over and over again: "For... these
simple concepts are not simple elements or atoms, but when included in a
certain syntactic relation and a certain system, any particular connection leads
to the entirety of metaphysics."
However, if the attempt to criticize the language of metaphysics fails and none of
the philosophers takes responsibility for it, and if submission becomes
inevitable, Derrida argues that any means of such submission is an alternative.
According to him, the criterion for the quality and productivity of a particular
discourse is "precisely its critical rigor, which is reflected in its connection with
the history of metaphysics and inherited concepts." When Derrida reflects on
the connection between speech and discursive inherited concepts, he
THEORETICAL ASPECTS IN THE FORMATION OF
PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
44
understands it as "an open and systematic statement of the issue related to the
state of speech that has inherited the resources necessary to deconstruct this
heritage."
Nietzsche and Heidegger criticized metaphysical concepts, striving to free
themselves from them, and supplied the philosophical apparatus with
neologisms. However, as we noted in paragraph 1 of the introduction to this
study, the logic behind introducing new concepts was to abandon established
meanings and encourage a revision of old terms. J. Derrida radicalizes this
strategy and concludes that if a word escapes its intended meaning, then it is not
necessary to invent new terms: the underlying idea is that they too can
eventually "settle" and acquire a stable metaphysical meaning. Moreover, as
indicated above, we cannot completely eliminate metaphysics from
philosophical discourse merely by criticizing the language of metaphysics.
Therefore, Derrida puts forward the following thesis: ..."There is no point in
attempting to shake up metaphysics without using metaphysical concepts; we
do not have a language (nor such syntax and vocabulary) that is alien to this
history; we cannot advocate for such a destructive position that does not enter
into the form, logic, and hidden relationships of the phenomenon we wish to
object to."
In his work "Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences,"
Derrida identifies two methods of criticizing metaphysical concepts:
a.
engaging in systematic and rigorous questioning of the history of these
concepts. Undoubtedly, this strategy is in many ways similar to M. Heidegger's
hermeneutic strategy. As Derrida points out, this type of analysis belongs neither
to the philological nor philosophical type, therefore it marks the first step
towards going beyond the boundaries of metaphysics, as well as beyond the
boundaries of philosophy itself. It is precisely "at the border of philosophy" that
metaphysics can be critically analyzed (we will examine the marginal strategy in
more detail below).
b.
Preserving all previous concepts as potentially useful tools while
remaining within the framework of empirical research and demonstrating
limitations everywhere. The uniqueness of this method is that it allows retaining
metaphysical concepts, but with the understanding that they are under the sign
of erasure, meaning they do not possess any absolute significance: "Henceforth,
such tools are not assigned any truth value or strict meaning; they can be
abandoned at times if other tools suddenly appear more convenient." Only
through such relatively effective means, which do not become new absolute
THEORETICAL ASPECTS IN THE FORMATION OF
PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCES
International scientific-online conference
45
tools, can the system of metaphysics be dismantled. This instrumentalism,
applied in the field of philosophy, forms an anti-metaphysical methodology,
where it is considered that "style can be separated from truth, means from style,
and objective meanings aimed at revealing this style." Indeed, to prevent this
method from falling into a set of tools, it is necessary to avoid absolutizing any
method. Furthermore, this style indicates an existing field of anti-metaphysical
activity characterized by the free play of meanings, and it is inappropriate to
claim that this style is associated with any particular centralized meaning.
References:
1 . Деррида Ж. Письмо и различие. - М.: Академический Проект, 2000. - 495
с.48.
2. Деррида Ж. Письмо японскому другу // Вопросы философии. - 1992. № 4.
-С. 53-37.
3. Деррида Ж. Позиции. - Киев: «Д.Л.», 1996. - 192 с.
4. Culler J. On deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism. - Ithaca,
New York: Cornell University Press, 1982. - 307 p.
5. СерльДж. Перевернутое слово // Вопросы философии. - 1992. №4. -
С. 58-69.
