In Jacques Derrida's formalisation of the problem of the gift in Donner le temps (1991), where Derrida offers a joint reading of Marcel Mauss’’ The Gift and Baudelaire's La Fausse monnaie, there is an apparent rejection of rational calculation (and of economism) in a narrow sense. This exclusion is only one of the steps in the deconstruction of the metaphysics of the gift, and of other motifs such as, for example, invention, forgiveness, and hospitality. In another step, calculation and economy (...) are the terms of logico-formal paradoxes, and engages us to think of the incompatible demands of calculability and incalculability between which reason is torn, and which Derrida has discussed, for example, in ‘‘The ““World”” of the Enlightenment to Come (Exception, Calculation and Sovereignty)’’ (2003). In this paper, I argue that in his evaluation of Mauss’’ moderate view of economy and exchange, Derrida has limited Mauss’’ notions of economy and rationality to reason as calculation. This evaluation jars with Derrida's deconstruction of calculation in his reading of Hegel and Rousseau among others, as I begin to show, Hegel, for whom ‘‘counting was a bad procedure’’. (shrink)

This article is a close reading of Jacques Derrida's critique of Marcel Mauss's classic, The Gift, and its revision through Charles Baudelaire's `The Counterfeit Coin'. Derrida's rejection of any exchange/reciprocity relation in the gift as an immoral binding of free subjects strangely accommodates the current ideological crisis of the gift in welfare societies. Moreover, Derrida's textual substitution of Baudelaire for Mauss repeats the counterfeit practice on which his own aporia of the gift is based.

This essay examines the capacity of language (‘word’) to convey what there is (‘world’). It draws on philosophical thought, which it seeks to apply to law while making specific reference to comparative legal studies, that is, to the investigation of law that is foreign to its interpreter.

. Being after time: Towards a politics of melancholy. Cultural Values: Vol. 2, No. 2-3, pp. 305-319.

Is it the task of legal semiotics or the legal philosophers to define legal semiotics? For the philosopher of law, the question recalls the distinction between philosophers’ philosophy of law and legal scholars’ philosophy of law. The thesis that the paper argues is that a semiotic legal perspective can also be sought from the analysis of anthropological knowledge on the origin of the social bond and society, implying a social and institutional theory of the mind. In the first paragraph, the (...) search for a different kind of rationality emerges from a semiotician, Jürgen Trabant, who analyses semiotically the thought of a rhetorician and philosopher of law, Giambattista Vico. In the second paragraph, the anthropological notion of social bond emerges from the debate on the relationship between the idea of the gift and that of exchange. In the third paragraph, the analysis of the legal notion of thirdness recognizes the central role of myth and fiction in the configuration of the civil world and sign, returning to Vico’s critical view of the philosophy of language as an institution of society. (shrink)

У статті розглядається питання авторства та його природи у зв’язку з подією Герострата. Проблемною стає ситуація забуття творців храму Артеміди і безсмертна слава його палія. У цьому ключі пропонується концепція деструктивного авторства як форма відображення авторства, заснованого не на звичному акті творення, а на протилежному йому – акті деструкції. При цьому проводиться розмежування деструктивного авторства як реалізації певних атрибутів авторства з використанням деструкції в якості інструмента й можливого його перевороту – авторства деструктивності як феномена, заснованого на автономності та першочерговості деструкції (...) по відношенню до авторства. Також розроблюються поняття «антиавтора» та «антидару», запропоновані як опозиції класичним поняттям «автора» й «дару». Герострат представлений як центральна й структуротворча фігура культурно-історичного наративу, яка досягає зворотного боку турботи про себе через акт деструкції на шляху до безсмертя. При цьому мова вже йде про антиавтора як про індивідуалізацію через авторство без творіння і замкнення індивіда на самому собі. Для історії Герострата неможливим є гомерівське питання через те, що сама природа його ситуації є гіпертрофацією індивідуального авторського витоку, котрий є несумісним зі спів-авторством. Не маючи творіння, він існує лише в якості прагнення здобути авторські дивіденди, а отже, в якості прагнення залишатись єдиним. Не менш важливим є звернення до питання дару в контексті авторства, який перевертається Геростратом у бік крадіжки. Якщо будь-яке авторство нерозривно пов’язане з даруванням, то деструктивне авторство містить у собі антидар – культурну крадіжку об’єкта чи суб’єкта, що піддається деструкції. Саме антидар дозволяє антиавтору реалізувати себе не лише як того, хто здійснює деструктивний акт, але й того, хто викрадає увагу та пам’ять, відокремлюючи їх від попереднього носія і застосовуючи до себе. Таким чином, у статті на прикладі Герострата аналізується розгортання логік, що йдуть паралельно або наперекір усталеній моделі авторства, заснованої на творчому акті, з пропозицією введення концептуальних понять, здатних розширити розуміння авторства та дослідити його в контексті деструктивних аспектів. (shrink)

The logic of gift and gratuitousness in business activity raised by the encyclical Caritas in Veritate stresses a deeper critical evaluation of the category of relation. The logic of gift in business includes two aspects. The first is considering the logic of gift as a new conceptual lens in order to view business relationship beyond contractual logic. In this view, it is crucial to see the circulation of goods as instrumental for the development of relationships. The second aspect is to (...) qualify the relationships established through the gift, and to think about the motivation in gift-giving, which has an ethical content. We give because we have received, and through gift-giving we develop relationships that have a high ‘bonding value’. Analysing the logic of gift in business management may permit us to gain an understanding of the ambiguity of gift-giving in organizations. Looking at the relationships between organizations and employees, and organizations and customers, we can discover why the logic of gift is often misunderstood or abused in its application, and how it should be applied to be more consistent with the message of Caritas in Veritate. (shrink)

The paper discusses the problem of self-sacrifice as posed by Derrida in Foi et Savior and by Schiller in the Theosophie des Julius. Whereas Derrida understands self-sacrifice as an act of violence against oneself in order not to subject others to violence, Schiller rightly insists that one must distinguish between egotistical and altruistic self-sacrifice. But even this doesn't go far enough: Altruistic self-sacrifice is different from suffering death as the consequence of an entirely unselfish love. Whoever loses his life out (...) of love does not give it up for others, whether selfishly or unselfishly. He loves the other—to death. Such a death is not a sacrifice. It results from a passion of love, not an act of violence against oneself. (shrink)

The paper discusses the problem of self-sacrifice as posed by Derrida in Foi et Savior and by Schiller in the Theosophie des Julius. Whereas Derrida understands self-sacrifice as an act of violence against oneself in order not to subject others to violence, Schiller rightly insists that one must distinguish between egotistical and altruistic self-sacrifice. But even this doesn’t go far enough: Altruistic self-sacrifice is different from suffering death as the consequence of an entirely unselfish love. Whoever loses his life out (...) of love does not give it up for others, whether selfishly or unselfishly. He loves the other—to death. Such a death is not a (self-)sacrifice. It results from a passion of love, not an act of violence against oneself. (shrink)

This paper begins with Barbara Johnson's examination of the erasure of sexual difference within the Yale school, and in particular her comments upon the work of Mary Shelley. Taking up hints in her statements about the relation between Mary Shelley's work and deconstruction, I suggest a reading of Mary Shelley's penultimate novel, Lodore, in relation to Derrida's Given Time. Lodore, which traditionally appeared a rather conservative novel to Mary Shelley's critics, has a number of parallels in its plot to the (...) logic of the gift as set out in Derrida's text. It also, however, allows us to begin to think through the related concept of the return, so crucial to both of the Shelley's thinking and writing. The essay analyses Lodore in relation to Derrida's account of the impossibility of the gift, in order, eventually, to move towards some comments about sexual difference, the novel, the gift and the return. (shrink)

Este trabalho tem como objetivo principal promover o diálogo entre Paul Ricœur e Jacques Derrida no que concerne às abordagens que estes dois autores fazem da noção de perdão. A partir disso, discute-se primeiramente a ideia do perdão difícil em Ricœur e, num segundo momento, aquela do perdão im-possível em Derrida. Ainda que falem a partir de posições de fala diferentes, segundo idiomas filosóficos distintos, sustenta-se que a confrontação de ambas as perspectivas nos dá a pensar o perdão de outro (...) modo, segundo a necessidade e a iminência do trato dessa questão em nossos dias. (shrink)

RESUMEN Se estudia el vínculo entre literatura y derecho en el pensamiento de Jacques Derrida. Se indican algunos recorridos de lectura y se dilucida lo que se entiende por literatura como institución, y su vínculo y alcances en relación con el plagio y con el derecho a decirlo todo en literatura. ABSTRACT The paper examines the connection between literature and law in the thought of Jacques Derrida. On the basis of certain readings, it explains literature as an institution, as well (...) as its relation and significance with respect to plagiarism and the right to say anything in literature. (shrink)