Resultado de búsqueda
Summary. In The Differend, based on Immanuel Kant 's views on the separation of Understanding, Judgment, and Reason, Lyotard identifies the moment in which language fails as the differend, and explains it as follows: "...the unstable state and instant of language wherein something which must be able to be put into phrases cannot yet ...
- Jean François Lyotard
- France
- 1983
- Le Différend
differend. A wrong or injustice that arises because the discourse in which the wrong might be expressed does not exist. To put it another way, it is a wrong or injustice that arises because the prevailing or hegemonic discourse actively precludes the possibility of this wrong being expressed.
Indeed, The Differend, arguable Lyotard’s most important statement to date, can be understood as a renewal of the sophistic (and specifically Gorgianic) view of invention. Poetics Today Purchase
22 de ago. de 2022 · Focussing on Lyotard’s text ‘The Differend’, I show how its conceptual framework and philosophy of language locates the cause of deep disagreement not in the epistemic realm, but in things which do not fully submit to epistemic evaluation: the radically incomplete and open nature of language, and our increasingly politically ...
- James Cartlidge
- jkcartlidge92@googlemail.com
A differend is a case of conflict between parties that cannot be equitably resolved for lack of a rule of judgement applicable to both. In the case of a differend, the parties cannot agree on a rule or criterion by which their dispute might be decided.
21 de sept. de 2018 · Lyotard offers a number of examples of differends: the relation of colonizer and the colonized or between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, but he opens The Differend with the case of the French Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson, who claimed that the only testimony that he would accept would be that of someone who had actually ...
At the beginning of the 1980s, Jean-François Lyotard elaborated the notion of the differend,1a notion that can be read as the central piece in a philosophical theory of radical disputes, indeed a theory of the radicality of dispute. The concept is explicitly meant to shed light on ethical, political and historical debates.
