推 artyman:Jacques Derrida ? 12/22 00:45
→ somedoubt:我只能告訴你，絕對不是分析。 12/22 00:45
※ 引述《A1Yoshi (我是妖西)》之銘言：
: 看推文吵起來還挺有趣的。我朋友給了我一個連結，我略讀一下發現
: 和我最近這幾篇文講的地方交集很多。不過我之前沒看過這一篇，連
: 結如下，給大家參考之：
: http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/analytic.asp
: 其中我引一段，做為回應我的「主流說」的補充：
: Although it appears to be a widespread view in the humanities that
: "analytic" philosophy is "dead" or "dying," the professional
: situation of analytic philosophy simply does not bear this out. All
: the Ivy League universities, all the leading state research universities,
: all the University of California campuses, most of the top liberal
: arts colleges, most of the flagship campuses of the second-tier state
: research universities boast philosophy departments that overwhelmingly
: self-identify as "analytic": it is hard to imagine a "movement" that
: is more academically and professionally entrenched than analytic
: philosophy.
: 順道一提，這段短短文字其實也（部分）呈現了我所謂的簡單直接清
: 楚：瞧他都用多簡單的英文字啊！大概除了"entrench"可能算是超過
: 台灣高中水準的單字以外，要看這一段根本不需要查字典！：D
: 還有一件事。其實我前面講的大師德西達....我看了幾篇文好像壓根
: 沒人把他分在歐陸哲學家。。。這件事也很有趣。
: 他絕對不是分析哲學家。而他又不屬於歐陸 -> 所以他根本不是哲學
: 家，哈哈哈～～
猜猜看以下這段是誰寫的好了：
We still do not know what yes（斜體）means and how this small word,
if it is one, operates in languague and in what we calmly refer to
as speech acts. We do not know whether this word shares anything at
all with any other word in any language, even with the word no (斜體)
, which is most certainly not symmetrical to it. We do not know if
the semantic, linguistic, rhetorical, or philosophical concept exists
capable of this event marked yes.
...
Yes（斜體） on the telephone can be crossed, in one and the same
occurence, by a variety of intonations whose differentiating
qualities are potentialized on stereophonic long waves. They may
appear only to go as far as interjection, the mechanical quasi-signal
that indicates either the mere presence of interlocutory Dasein （斜體）
at the other end of the line (Hello, yes?) or the passive docility
of a secretary or a subordinate who, like some archiving machine, i
s ready to record orders (yes, sir 括弧斜體) or who is satisfied
with purely informative answers (yes, sir; no, sir 括弧斜體)
這段算不算「簡單直接又清楚」？
喔，當然高中生可能得查一下 sematic, linguistic, rhetorical,
symmetrical. occurence, stereophonic, interjection, quasi-,
interlocutory, docility, subordinate 這些字啦。
不過這麼簡單又清楚的段落，到底是歐陸的還是分析的呢？
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 82.231.224.29