post class for 4/20/10

well today was definitely interesting with our debates and talks of differance and the ideas of language. I think it is something i have a good deal of trouble wrapping my mind around, but the truth of the matter is I just don’t care. I don’t mean this offensively to anyone, but it just seems as thought it is a waste of time. Jenkins, Habermas, Marx, Barthes, De Sausser all of these men had relevant ideas about interesting topics. Here we come to derrida ad we have something so abstract the man who wrote it most likely does not understand it. I just don’t think he was able to see the folly in his work. we live in a world where a language no longer is the barrier between a people, and it is also something that is constantly changing. How can you ever attempt to define or categorize something that is changing so rapidly? I understand this man wanted only to look at the differences and various other things about language, yet at the same time i am left wondering truly deep down inside what it is that this man planned to accomplish or did he realize at the onset that he was never going to take care of this. I read the reading, and yes i admit i did not understand it very much, there were some things i did and some i didnt. I find it much easier to relate Derrida to others than i do speak about his work in any shape way or form. I think this reading was really good but it is something along the same lines as Descartes, it is reall hard to unpack and once you have unpacked it you dont have near as much understanding it as you did unpacking it, leaving you with an empty feeling and nothing but contempt for the writer. enjoy the west reading guys! it is a ton easier than this one!