RESUMO O artigo tem por objetivo analisar a raiz heideggeriana do tratamento da história no jovem Derrida. Juntamente à sua análise do problema genético em Husserl, Derrida constrói sua discussão crítica da razão histórica referindo-se ao problema da historicidade originária em "Ser e Tempo". São conhecidos os seus estudos dos anos 1970 em matéria de Heidegger, em torno do problema do tempo e da diferença, porém, uma nova e mais explícita evidência sobre esta relação primária com Heidegger em torno do (...) problema histórico é oferecida pelo curso que Derrida ministrou na École Normale Supérieure de Paris no período 1964-1965, sob o título "Heidegger: a questão do Ser e da História". Nesse curso, que acaba de ser publicado, Derrida discute a questão linguística associando-a ao problema heideggeriano da contaminação ineludível entre narração e fundação. No texto que segue, pretende-se analisar os termos de tal herança heideggeriana e, ao mesmo tempo, destacar as questões críticas que emergem desse curso e detalham a distância entre o jovem Derrida e Heidegger. ABSTRACT The article aims at analyzing the treatment of history in Young Derrida under a Heideggerian basis. Together with that, add Heidegger's analysis on the genetic issue in Husserl, Derrida builds his critical discussion on the historical reason referring to the originary historicity issue in "Ser e Tempo". His studies from the 70s, in terms of Heidegger, are known, regarding the issue of time and difference, but, a new and more explicit evidence on that primary relation with Heidegger round the historical issue is offered by the course Derrida taught at the École Normale Supérieure de Paris from 1964-1965, under the title "Heidegger: a questão do Ser e da História". In that course, which has just been published, Derrida discusses the linguistic issue linking it to Heideggerian issue of the unavoidable contamination between narrations and foundation. In the text below, we intend to analyze terms such as Heideggerian heritage and, at the same time, highlighting the critical issues emerging from that course and which detail the distance between the young Derrida and Heidegger. (shrink)

RESUMEN El presente artículo pretende definir y comparar las distintas “deconstrucciones de lo trágico” de Lacoue-Labarthe y Derrida con vistas a precisar los términos a través de los cuales han concebido la relación entre filosofía y literatura y marcar la diferencia con la que abordan el poder de lo negativo propio de la instancia trágica. El estudio de esos focos permite también aclarar el rendimiento político de la cuestión literaria en ambos autores, enfatizando las distintas herencias a la que se (...) refieren y las distancia que estas herencias producen en sus respectivos planteamientos. ABSTRACT This article aims to define and compare the different “deconstructions of the tragic” of Lacoue-Labarthe and Derrida in order to clarify the terms through which they have conceived the relationship between philosophy and literature, and in order to precise the difference in approaching the power of the negative, that is a distinctive instance of the tragic. The study of these notions also makes it possible to clarify the political impact of the literary issue in both authors, emphasizing the different inheritances to which they refer and the distance that these inheritances produce in their respective approaches. (shrink)

Resumen: El artículo pretende realizar una confrontación entre el modelo fenomenológico de Merleau-Ponty y la propuesta deconstructiva de Derrida acerca del tema del lenguaje y de la problemática genética. En Merleau-Ponty, la cuestión genética se vincula a la noción de cuerpo y a la expresividad precategorial de los gestos, en los que el silencio describe una dimensión opaca e inalcanzable temáticamente, pero originaria y decisiva para la mirada fenomenológica. Por otra parte, Derrida es un crítico muy radical de todo uso (...) filosófico de un origen pleno, y por lo tanto también de la proyección de un silencio primitivo pretendida por Merleau-Ponty. Sin embargo, la noción de silencio de Merleau-Ponty no cumple cabalmente la función que Derrida le asigna, siendo siempre para Merleau-Ponty un espacio diacrónico y diferencial. El texto que sigue pretende mostrar los puntos de contactos y de distancias entre Merleau-Ponty y Derrida con respecto al tema del lenguaje en general, haciendo también hincapié sobre la cuestión de la literatura, a la que ambos filósofos se dedican ampliamente y a la que ambos pretenden extender las cuestiones evocadas, con el objeto de demostrar que en este ámbito los motivos de oposición entre los dos planteamientos se hacen efímeros.: This article aims to realize a confrontation between Merleau-Ponty's phenomenological model and Derrida's deconstructive proposal, with regard to the subject of language and the genetic problematic. In Merleau-Ponty, the genetic question is linked to the notion of the body and the pre-categorial expressiveness of gestures, in which silence describes a dimension that is opaque and thematically unattainable, but original and decisive for the phenomenological viewpoint. Derrida, in contrast, is a radical critic of the philosophical use of such origin, and therefore also of the projection to a primitive silence sought by Merleau-Ponty. However, the notion of silence in Merleau-Ponty does not fully meet fully the role assigned to it by Derrida, silence being always for Merleau-Ponty a diachronic and differential space. This article aims to show the points in common and the differences between Merleau-Ponty and Derrida on the issue of language in general. Also discussed is the topic of literature, with which both philosophers are widely engaged and to which both try to extend the issues under consideration in this paper. It is argued that in this area the motives behind the opposition between the two approaches become ephemeral. (shrink)

W. Benjamin expresa su inquietud política en las tesis acerca de la “violencia revolucionaria” como “excepción divina”, valorada por J. Derrida como una ruptura histórica; esto permite ver una analogía e incluso una continuidad en estos autores. Sin embargo, Derrida subraya la inadecuación política y el efecto “insoportable” del planteamiento de Benjamin. Se intenta comprender el fondo de esta crítica y avanzar hacia una hipótesis que haga converger las dos problematizaciones de la violencia y las complemente con el tema mesiánico (...) y el problema de la responsabilidad. (shrink)

Sur la notion de « mutation », Jean-Luc Nancy a insisté assez régulièrement dans des textes récents sur l’actualité et sur l’histoire. Plus qu’une simple transformation et qu’une métamorphose, la mutation est conçue comme une notion capable d’indiquer les ruptures et les recompositions structurelles qui permettent de considérer les puissances de civilisation et les expressions des époques, en évitant tout recours à des mouvements progressifs ou téléologiques, mais aussi sans réduire l’histoire à une simple fiction narrative. La mutation rejoue, dans (...) l’espace du rapport, l’advenir historique. (shrink)

RESUMEN W. Benjamin expresa su inquietud política en las tesis acerca de la "violencia revolucionaria" como "excepción divina", valorada por J. Derrida como una ruptura histórica; esto permite ver una analogía e incluso una continuidad en estos autores. Sin embargo, Derrida subraya la inadecuación política y el efecto "insoportable" del planteamiento de Benjamin. Se intenta comprender el fondo de esta crítica y avanzar hacia una hipótesis que haga converger las dos problematizaciones de la violencia y las complemente con el tema (...) mesiánico y el problema de la responsabilidad. ABSTRACT W. Benjamin expresses his political concerns in his theses on "revolutionary violence" as "divine exception". J. Derrida sees this as a historical rupture, a fact that allows for an analogy and even a continuity between the two authors. However, Derrida highlights the political inadequacy and the "unbearable" effect of Benjamin's formulation. The article seeks an in-depth understanding of this critique in order to advance toward a hypothesis that makes the two approaches to violence converge and that complements them with a discussion of Messianism and the issue of responsibility. (shrink)

This article analyzes Heidegger’s Paris lecture, “The End of Philosophy and the Task of Thinking,” in an attempt to understand the historical “task” that Heidegger seeks to examine when confronted with the agony of philosophy today. I attempt to valorize the understanding of time and history that Heidegger stages in his reading by demonstrating its entrance to be radical and novel with respect to other moments in Heidegger’s production: history here is not of “destiny”, that is, it does not coincide (...) with the appropriating orientation of man in time already presented in Heidegger’s other texts; rather, it is understood on the basis of the opening to the future that fragilizes and suspends all hope and all historical resolution. History is thought here as the desertification of present times, the completion of metaphysical nihilism, in which there opens at the same time a “perhaps” that, repeated many times throughout the lecture, takes up in all its complexity the problem of the future’s coming, of the extraordinary, of the opening, that is, of what, from the future, exceeds destiny. (shrink)