“Derrida/Searle”— a masterclass with Steven Taubeneck

Welcome to SADHO’s first Guest Expert event on Analytic philosophy.

In our Short Course, comprised of Magee’s peerless interviews with five representatives of the Analytic tradition, we covered the following:

1. Quinton — covered Wittgenstein, early and late.
2. Ayer — covered Russell, philosophical analysis, and logical positivism.
3. Bernard Williams — gave a sparkling and wide-ranging overview of linguistic philosophy, the best of the series.
4. Quine — covered Quine. This was somewhat painful to watch. When Magee very politely pointed out inconsistencies, Quine simply changed the subject.
5. Searle — discussed philosophy of language, himself, and, of course, J. L. Austin.

This time, as a perfect rejoinder to our last meeting on Searle, Dr. Stephen Taubeneck will teach a masterclass on the Derrida/Searle Debate. Professor of German and Philosophy at UBC, Dr. Taubeneck has been wrestling with the core texts of 20-cent. phenomenology and existentialism for over 30 years, and has worked and collaborated with both Derrida and Rorty.

Here’s an historical outline of the famous debate:

1. In August 1971, Derrida gave a conference speech called “Signature Event Context,” that analyzed J. L. Austin's theory of the illocutionary act. It was first published in the journal Glyph (vol. 1) and then in the book Margins of Philosophy (1972).
2. In 1977, Searle wrote “Reiterating the differences: A reply to Derrida,” in Glyph (vol. 2) which accused Derrida of misunderstanding Austin.
3. In 1988, Derrida published Limited Inc., his book-length reproduction and continuation of the debate. It includes (a) #1, (b) a précis of #2, (c) “Limited Inc a b c …”, which is Derrida’s 1977 response to #2 (printed in the same issue of Glyph), and (d) a new 1988 concluding afterword.

Now, on the 45th anniversary of Searle’s attack on Derrida’s perceived attack on Austin, Dr. Taubeneck will guide us through the twists and turns of the debate to ask key questions and extract core takeaways. Questions include:

• Was Searle right that Derrida misunderstood Austin?
• Was Searle attacking an argument or a writing style?
• What was at work motivating Searle’s rejections and dismissals?
• What, in retrospect, is the important takeaway from this debate?

Join us for a whirlwind discussion led by one of the most charismatic, penetrating, and lucid professors I’ve had the luck of knowing.

And what a great way to put the great Magee interview from last session in a broader, illuminating, and historically informative context!

METHOD/HOMEWORK

Watch this great and hilarious documentary, Derrida (2002) (OLD LINK to archive.org, which is down; NEW LINK for downloaders; FINAL LINK for people who like to watch things online.)

Review Dr. Taubeneck’s notes. Parts 1 and 2 have been combined into a unified edition, which you can download here.

Read (1) and (2) for sure; (3) and (4) if you can. (You can read these online via Dropbox viewer, but please use the Download option instead, especially (4) since it contains Internet bookmarks.)

1. Derrida (1971) “Signature Event Context” (LINK)
2. Searle (1977) “Reiterating the differences” (LINK)
3. Derrida (1988) Limited, Inc. (LINK)
4. Secondary sources: a book, photocopies, slides, and links (LINK: N.B. You must Download for the bookmarks to work.)