Derrida Quote of the Day
I do not have confidence in just any conceptual distinctions. When this or that conceptual opposition does not operate distinctly, when it functions only by virtue of a too ”weak” idealization that pays the price of excluding all phenomena called “marginal” and of being incapable of describing or accounting for anything whatsoever, then,without renouncing either the concept or the distinction, without capitulating to empiricism, for example, to the “a little fictional” or the “somewhat ironic,” I believe one must search to comprehend what is going on, to analyze the presuppositions of discourse, to transform its axiomatics, to propose other conceptual distinctions and even, however troubling that may appear, another general “logic.” This logic can be ”other” to the point of overturning a good many habits and comforts. It can lead us to complicate–distinctly–the logic of binary oppositions and to a certain use of the value of distinction attached to it. The latter has indeed certain limits and a history, which I have precisely tried to question. But that leads neither to “illogic” nor to “indistinction” nor to “indeterminacy. ” This other ”logic” does not authorize, in theoretical discourse as such, any kind of approximative statement. It never renounces…clear and rigorous distinction.
From the Afterword in Limited INC (pp. 126-127). Italics in original, bold lines added by me.
So much for irrationalism, poetic obscurantism and lack of argumentative discipline.