Logocentrism Revisited: Polysemy and Presence in Derridean Deconstruction

Introduction

In "Of Grammatology," Derrida challenges the entrenched framework of Western metaphysics by interrogating "logocentrism." He defines logocentrism as the philosophical tradition that privileges speech over writing, viewing speech as the direct expression of thought and presence, while writing is seen as a derivative, mediated, and potentially corrupt form of communication. This article aims to elucidate Derrida's concept of logocentrism by exploring its historical roots, its implications for language and philosophy, and its polysemic resonance within different philosophical traditions. By referencing diverse sources, we will examine how he reshapes our understanding of language, presence, and meaning through his critique.

Origin of the Term "Logocentrism"

The term "logocentrism" was coined in the early 20th century by German philosopher Ludwig Klages. Initially, it described a philosophical stance within Western thought that exalted the spoken word, or "logos," as the foremost conveyer of truth and meaning. This tradition asserted that language, especially spoken language, directly accesses reality in a more immediate and authentic manner compared to other forms of communication.

Derrida’s Adoption and Deconstructive Project

Jacques Derrida appropriated and transformed the concept of logocentrism as part of his broader deconstructive project. For Derrida, logocentrism embodies a foundational assumption within Western metaphysics and epistemology. His critique goes beyond mere preference for speech over writing; he identifies logocentrism as a deep-seated philosophical bias that favors presence, identity, and stability while marginalizing absence, difference, and ambiguity.

The Emergence of Grammatology: A New Concept of "Writing"

Derrida observes a contemporary shift from the linguistic turn, which emphasizes the centrality of language in constructing reality, to a "scriptural turn," where writing becomes the primary means of understanding consciousness, culture, and reality itself. Advances in fields like molecular biology, cybernetics, and information technology highlight the pervasive role of writing, code, and inscription, challenging the traditional hierarchy that privileges speech over writing. Derrida proposes a radical rethinking of writing, not as a mere derivative of speech but as a foundational element of language and reality. This new concept, "originary writing," suggests that language has always been a form of "writing," overturning the idea that writing is a secondary supplement to speech. It is crucial to note that "originary (arche-) writing" is not simply "writing."

Deconstructing Logocentrism

Derrida’s deconstruction of logocentrism entails unraveling its implicit binaries and hierarchies. He argues that logocentric thought constructs meaning through oppositional pairs such as speech/writing, presence/absence, and truth/appearance. By demonstrating the contingency and arbitrariness of these binaries, Derrida reveals how logocentrism perpetuates hierarchical structures of knowledge, limiting alternative modes of expression and understanding.

Critique of the Western Philosophical Tradition

Derrida extends his critique of logocentrism across the entire Western philosophical tradition, tracing its roots from Ancient Greek thought to modern thinkers like Martin Heidegger. He contends that logocentrism underpins metaphysical assumptions about truth, language, and reality, privileging speech as the primary vehicle of meaning and truth. Consequently, Western philosophy historically sidelines writing and other forms of representation.

Historical Development of Logocentrism

1. Aristotle and the Hierarchy of Signs: In De Interpretatione, Aristotle establishes a distinction between the sound or mark (loosely associated with the Saussurean signifier) and the idea or concept (sometimes called the signified). Speech, directly linked to thought, is prioritized over writing, which is viewed as a secondary representation. Here, “logos” encompasses both "word" and "idea."
2. Christian Theology: Christian theology reinforces logocentrism by associating signs with a transcendent realm. The sign (spoken or written) signifies a reality beyond the sensible world, embedding the metaphysical belief in a fundamental, self-present origin behind all signs. In this context, “logos” signifies "truth" and "God."
3. Modern Philosophy: Philosophers like Rousseau and Hegel continue the evolution of logocentrism by maintaining the primacy of speech over writing. Even anti-metaphysical thinkers like Nietzsche and Heidegger, according to Derrida, remain within the logocentric paradigm, operating within the oppositional logic they seek to overturn. In this context, “logos” is interpreted as "word." These examples illustrate the polysemic character of “logos” and demonstrate how different philosophical traditions have integrated it within their theoretical frameworks.

Exploiting the Polysemic Character of Logocentrism

Central to Derrida’s approach is his recognition of the polysemic nature inherent in logocentrism. He explores how the term "logos" encompasses multiple meanings—spanning from speech and reason to truth and essence—depending on the philosophical context. Derrida prompts readers to discern the nuanced application of logocentrism in different contexts, highlighting its versatility and susceptibility to varied interpretations. By exploiting the polysemic character of logocentrism, Derrida engages with diverse philosophical issues. He critiques logocentrism’s bias toward speech while acknowledging language’s importance as a tool for understanding and communication. This nuanced approach challenges entrenched philosophical assumptions, encouraging exploration of alternative perspectives on language, truth, and meaning.

Conclusion

Derrida’s treatment of logocentrism as a polysemic concept underscores his broader deconstructive project. By unpacking its historical origins, critiquing its implications for Western philosophy, and exploiting its multiple meanings, he invites us to rethink the nature of language and knowledge. This approach transcends traditional boundaries, opening new avenues for philosophical inquiry into the complexities of human communication and understanding. "Of Grammatology" marks a significant shift in recognizing the mediated nature of all signs, fundamentally altering our understanding of language, presence, and meaning. Engaging with this text requires consideration of the polysemic nature of "logos" and its profound implications for understanding the interconnectedness of logocentrism and phonocentrism.

However, considering Saussure’s view that “the linguistic sign is a two-sided psychological entity,” where “what characterizes each most exactly is being whatever the others are not,” the question arises: how does Saussure’s concept of "signe" relate to the logocentric tradition? Put differently, does it relate to logocentrism at all?

Related Post

A Conversation with Saussure

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2023/10/blog-post_12.html

The Protean Nature of 'Logos': Polysemy in Philo-Theological Thought

https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2024/06/blog-post_30.html

 Bibliography

Derrida, Jacques. Of Grammatology. Corrected Edition. Translated by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997. Copyright © 1974, 1976, 1997 by The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Gaston, Sean, and Ian Maclachlan, eds. Reading Derrida's "Of Grammatology". London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2011.

Bradley, Arthur. Derrida’s Of Grammatology: An Edinburgh Philosophical Guide. Edinburgh University Press, 2008.