With ‘the delicacy of a bear

Lévi-Strauss, Derrida, and the logic of anthropology

Bibliographic Data

ID7093695
AuthorsDylan Shaul (0000-0001-5109-8907, New School, corresponding author)
Year2017
Volume18
Issue1
Pages18-40
Publication date2017-01-02
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueDistinktion Journal of Social Theory (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1600-910X • E-ISSN: 2159-9149
PublisherRoutledge (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/1600910x.2016.1276467
OpenAlexW2612455493
LanguageEN
References cited33

The Lévi-Strauss/Derrida debate saw two of the great minds of the twentieth-century wrestle with some of the most vexing problems of anthropological theory: the relationship between speech and writing, the violence of social life, and the logic (or lack thereof) of anthropology itself. A careful consideration of the debate uncovers three oscillations present in Lévi-Strauss’ corpus: between the affirmation and negation of the law of the excluded middle, the reducibility of the human sciences to the natural sciences, and the value of philosophy. Outside the confines of the debate itself, Derrida’s celebration of Lévi-Strauss for his embracing of myth and bricolage nevertheless reveals a particular reluctance toward that embrace on Lévi-Strauss’ part – a modality of nostalgia, manifest within the debate, for a lost presence of speech. Speech act theory sheds further light on a certain underlying unity of speech and writing, the limitations of the law of the excluded middle, and what may have really transpired in the incident that sparked the debate. Ultimately, Lévi-Strauss’ taxonomy of and implication in science, myth, and art – with respect to the debate and beyond – signify that anthropology can be and in fact is all three

Biology · Delicacy · Humanities · Levi strauss · Sociology · Anthropological Studies and Insights · Anthropology · Emile Durkheim and Sociology · Philosophy · Ecology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub