1/28/2016

PresentationonDerridasTheGiftofDeath|Anundfrsich

Anundfrsich

PresentationonDerridasTheGiftofDeath
Wednesday,February19,2014StephenKeating
InclassthissemesterIvolunteeredtogiveapresentation
summarizingsomekeypointsfromDerridasTheGiftof
Deathforagroupthathadnotreadthebook.Itwasfunto
engageinacarefulreadingofthistextafterlooking
atinterpretationsofDerridasworkonreligionbybothGil
AnidjarandMichaelNaas.

PROBLEMATIC
AfterbeginningthefirsttwochaptersofTheGiftof
DeathwithadiscussionofJanPatokaand
Heidegger,DerridapivotstoKierkegaardsFearandTrembling.Fearandtremblingis,ofcourse,a
referencetoSt.Paul,anditcomesfromhislettertothePhilippians,2:12:Whereforemybeloved,
asyehavealwaysobeyed,notasinmypresenceonly,butnowmuchmoreinmyabsence,work
outyourownsalvationwithfearandtrembling.Fearandtremblingisthusthecomportmentof
thetheonewhostandsintheabsenceofthemaster.WedonotknowGod,whereGodis,where
Godcomesfrom,orwhereGodawaitsus.Godsignifiesthatwhichiswhollyinaccessibletous,
yetatthesametime,thattowhichorbeforewhomweareresponsible.Derridaassertsthatthis
request/demandforobedienceonPaulspart,inPaulsabsence,isarepetitionarepetitionofthe
absenceofGod.Godssecrets,deliberations,presence,reasons,intentions(ifGodhasany)are
nevershared,andneitherareGodsdecisions.Iftheywere,thenGodwouldnolongerbethat
whollyother[toutauture](58).
DerridaarguesthatitisthisconundruminthePaulinetextthatledKierkegaardtochoosethis
titleforhistext,andthatthereforealsoledDerridatouseKierkegaardstextasthefoilforhis
reflectionsonthegift,thesecret,andresponsibility,butalsothemeaningofreligionand
Christianity.Derrida,intheessayFaithandKnowledgereturnstothisproblematicand
conjoiningreligiontoChristianity.Fornowwesimplynotethatthelatterisnotsimplyaspecies
oftheformer,butintheconclusionwewillreturntothewaythatDerridaquestionsacertain
logicofdebtandtranscendencethatistiedupwithChristianity.
Introducinganotherthemethatwillbeimportantlaterinthetext,Derridalinksthe

https://itself.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/presentationonderridasthegiftofdeath/

1/6

1/28/2016

PresentationonDerridasTheGiftofDeath|Anundfrsich

Introducinganotherthemethatwillbeimportantlaterinthetext,Derridalinksthe
unsubstitutabilityofonesdeath(Heidegger),totheconceptofsacrifice.ThetremblingofFear
andTrembling,Derridastates
is,orsoitseems,theveryexperienceofsacrifice.Not,firstofall,intheHebraicsenseofthe
term,korban,whichrefersmoretoanapproachoracomingcloseto,andwhichhasbeen
wronglytranslatedassacrifice,butinasmuchassacrificepresumestheputtingtodeathof
theuniqueintermsofitsbeingunique,irreplaceable,andmostprecious.Italsotherefore
referstotheimpossibilityofsubstitution,theunsubstitutable;andthenalsotothesubstitution
ofananimalforman;andfinally,especiallythis,bymeansofthisimpossiblesubstitution
itself,itreferstowhatlinksthesacredtosacrificeandsacrificetosecrecy.(59)
Thereis,inDerridasKierkegaard,adoublesecret:theonealreadymentionedbetweenaperson,
inthiscaseAbraham,andGod,butthereisanothersecretbetweenAbrahamandhisfamily.
AbrahamsdutybeforeGodmeansthathedoesnotspeaktohisfamily.Thesecretbetween
AbrahamandhisfamilyisalsoasecretbetweenAbrahamandhimself.Hedoesnotunderstand
God,(wemightrightlyaskalongwithAbraham:whywouldGodaskhimtocommitthisactof
religiousterrorism?)therefore,responsibilityrequiresthatAbrahamcannotspeak.But,(Derridas)
KierkegaardremindsusthattheethicalorderrequiresustocommunicateandBykeepingthe
secret,Abrahambetraysethics(60).
DerridaisnotinganotherhomologybetweenKierkegaardandtheinterpretationofHeidegger
thathedevelopedinthepreviouschapters:Justasnoonecandieinmyplace,noonecanmakea
decision,whatwecalladecision,inmyplace.But,[andhereisthekey]assoonasonespeaks,
assoonasoneentersthemediumoflanguage,onelosesthatverysingularity(60).
Speakingendsourabsolutesingularitybecauseittranslatesintothegeneral(61).Yet,
responsibility,asphilosophyhasalwaysargued,requiresthetranslationofouractionintothe
generaltoallowforpublicaccountability.Suchistheaporiaofresponsibility:onealwaysrisks
notmanagingtoaccedetotheconceptofresponsibilityintheprocessofformingit(62).Thisis
deconstruction:responsibilityrequires,atthesametime,thesecretandthebetrayalofthesecret.
Derridacallsitbothascandalandaparadox(61).
Morethanproblematizingphilosophicalconcepts,Derrida/Kierkegaardispushingustothink
howtheethicalisatemptation(62),tothinkaboutthewaysthatourveryattemptstobeethical,
toberesponsible,tomaketherightdecision,canthemselvesdirectlyleadusto
beunethical,irresponsible,toavoidadecision.
RESPONSIBILITY
Responsibility,ifbythatwemeancalculating,presentingoneselfbeforeonesfellows,tohumans,
tosociety,tothosewhohaveaninterestinaffirmingyourselfjustificationbecausetheyarein
somewaysimilartoyou,Derridacallsthisresponsibilityangodice,anegotheodicy,anauto
justification.

DerridaplaysKierkegaardagainstHegelonthispointofthegapbetweenthedemandforthe

https://itself.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/presentationonderridasthegiftofdeath/

2/6

1/28/2016

PresentationonDerridasTheGiftofDeath|Anundfrsich

DerridaplaysKierkegaardagainstHegelonthispointofthegapbetweenthedemandforthe
HegeliandemandformanifestationandtheKierkegaardiandoublesecretoftheethical.Hegels
ethicalrequiresthattherebenofinalsecretsforphilosophy(63)buttheknightoffaithcan
neithercommunicatetonorbeunderstoodbyanyone,shecanthelptheotheratall(64).Hegelis
nottheonlytarget,Kantalsocomesinforcritique:
Kantexplainsthattoactmorallyistoactoutofdutyandnotonlybyconformingtoduty.
Kierkegaardseesactingoutofduty,intheuniversalizablesenseofthelaw,asadereliction
ofonesabsoluteduty.Itisinthissensethatabsoluteduty(towardGodandinthesingularity
offaith)impliesasortofgiftorsacrificethatreachestowardafaithbeyondbothdebtand
duty,beyonddutyasaformofdebt.Thisisthedimensionthatprovidesforagiftofdeath
which,beyondhumanresponsibility,beyondtheuniversalconceptofduty,isaresponseto
absoluteduty.(64)
However,Kierkegaardsknightoffaithisnotpursuingapassionlessresignationtoduty.
ReferencingJesussayinginLukethatfollowinghimrequireshateofonesfamily,Kierkegaards
Abrahammustlovehissonabsolutelyinordertocometothepointwherehewillgranthim
death,tocommitwhatethicswouldcallhateandmurder(65).Thesecretoffaithtroublesour
cleancategoriesofloveandhate.
Wearecomingtoacrucialpoint.ThisexegesisofanexegesisofthestoryofAbrahamandIsaac
allowsDerridatointerrogatetheconceptofabsoluteresponsibility,aconceptthatputsusintoa
relation,butarelationwithoutrelationordoublesecret,withtheabsoluteother.IntheBiblical
text,absolutesingularitygoesbythenameofGod.
Asanaside,inreading/writingthisway,Derridaisperformingarelationtothetraditionof
Christianity/religion/sacredtextsthatIfindappealing.Wearenotbeingaskedtobelievethe
text,ortoascribetoaJudeoChristianIslamicdoctrineofGod.Derridaremindsusagainand
againofthesharedheritageamongstallthreereligionsofthebook,thereligionsoftheracesof
Abraham(65)ofthisparticularstory.Thebiblicaltextsareamaterial,acollectionoftraditions
alongwiththeothertraditions,philosophicalandliterary,thatcanbethoughtwithandthrough.
Thebiblicaltextsare,inonesense,textslikeanyother,yet,atthesametime,bytakingthem
seriouslyandnotasamerefable,wecanfindinthemanopennesstotheabsolutesecret,or
absoluteresponsibility,orthewhollyOther,thatDerridawantstointerrogate.Readinthisway,
thesetexts,andthehistoryandtheologiesofthevariousreligions,bearwitnesstothatwhichis
whollyOther.
Nevertheless,Derridascritiqueofreligiondemonstrateshow,throughitstechno/teleextension,
especiallythemediaizationthatisdistinctlyandinextricablyChristian,religion(andnotjustthe
fundamentalistvariety!)oftencoversoverthesecret,stampsitout,repressestheradicalcallofthe
Other.Insteadofopennesstothewhollyother,arepressedeconomyisenactedthat,throughits
displacementintotheheightsofthesacred,isallthemoredestructive.
Returningtothistext,ithardlyneedstobesaid,butitisbecomingclearthatDerridaisnottrying
tohelpusrefineaChristianethicscenteredondivinecommandorinsistence.Whathefindsin
KierkegaardstextisalogicthatresonateswiththelogicofdeconstructionthatDerridahasbeen
developingsincehisveryfirstpublishedworks.FearandTremblingallowshimtoelucidatemore
https://itself.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/presentationonderridasthegiftofdeath/
clearlyhowdeconstructionaddressesitselftoquestionsofethicsandresponsibility.Derridais 3/6

1/28/2016

PresentationonDerridasTheGiftofDeath|Anundfrsich

clearlyhowdeconstructionaddressesitselftoquestionsofethicsandresponsibility.Derridais
respondinghiscriticswhohavewrittenoffdeconstructionasinapplicabletorealworld
questions.Deconstructionhasalwaysbeenaboutethics,hecontends,andIminclinedtoagree.
Alwaystheprovocateur,Derridausesthismonstrousstoryofinfanticideandreligiousterrorism
tomanifestdeconstructionsethicaldemand,attackingtheknightsofgoodconscience.
Thisexceptionalstory,whatKierkegaardcallsaparadox,becomesDerridasparadigm.Heasks,
isnotAbrahamsexceptionaldecisionstructurallythesameasthedecisionsthatwemakeevery
momentofeveryday?Ifresponsibilitytiesustotheother,we,inourbindingtothesingularityof
theother,areperpetuallycaughtupinthespaceorriskofabsolutesacrifice(68).Thereare
alsoothers,Derridaremindsus,
aninfinitenumberofthem,theinnumerablegeneralityofotherstowhomIshouldbebound
bythesameresponsibility,ageneralanduniversalresponsibilityIcannotrespondtothe
call,therequest,theobligation,oreventheloveofanotherwithoutsacrificingtheotherother,
theotherothers.Everyother(one)isevery(bit)other[toutautreesttoutautre];everyoneelseis
completelyorwhollyother.Theconceptsofresponsibility,ofdecision,orofduty,are
condemnedaprioritoparadox,scandal,andaporia.Paradox,scandal,andaporiaare
themselvesnothingotherthansacrifice,theexposureofconceptualthinkingtoitslimit,toits
deathandfinitude.AssoonasIenterintoarelationwiththeother,withthegaze,look,
request,love,command,orcalloftheother,IknowthatIcanrespondonlybysacrificing
ethics,thatistosaybysacrificingwhateverobligesmetoalsorespond,inthesameway,inthe
sameinstant,toallothers.Iputtodeath,Ibetrayandlie,Idontneedtoraisemyknifeover
mysononMountMoriahforthat.Dayandnight,ateveryinstant,onalltheMountMoriahsof
thethisworld,Iamdoingthat,raisingmyknifeoverwhatIloveandmustlove,overthe
other,tothisorthatothertowhomIoweabsolutefidelity,incommensurably.Abrahamis
faithfultoGodonlyinhistreachery,inthebetrayalofhisown,andinthebetrayalofthe
uniquenessofeachoneofthem,exemplifiedhereinhisonlybelovedson.Hewouldnotbe
abletooptforfidelitytohisown,ortohisson,unlessheweretobetraytheabsoluteother:
God,ifyouwish.(69)
We,too,hereinthisveryroom,me,andeachofyoulisteningtome,iscaughtupinthissame
sacrifice.Presumably,weareherebecausewearerespondingtothecallofjustice.Itisourdesire
anddecisiontoseekouttheFutureCommunity.Butinourresponsetojustice,wearebetraying
allthemillionsofotherstowhomweoweourduty,ourobligation.AndDerridaremindsus,not
justthehumanothers,theanimalsthatareevenmoreotherthanmyfellows.Weareobligedto
everystarvingbeing,everyonethatsuffers.ThisroomisourMountMoriah,wherewehave
madeanethicaldecisionofsacrifice,ortosacrifice.Byrespondingtothiscalltothinkanother
community,weareneglectingoururgentresponsibilitiestoalltheotherothers.Speaking,inthis
place,inthislanguage,sacrificingonthisparticularaltar,wehavenolanguageinwhichwecan
justify,manifest,makeethicaloursacrificetotheabsolutelyOther.
Derridainsiststhatwemustnotforgetthatintheethicalpointofview,whichmustremainvalid,
Abrahamisamurderer.Whatinitiallysoundslikeapurelyindividualisticcritiqueisnow
extended.Everyotheriswhollyother[toutautreesttoutautre],butourentiresystemoflawsand
rights,is
innowayperturbedbythefactthat,becauseofthestructureofthelawsofthemarketthat

https://itself.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/presentationonderridasthegiftofdeath/

4/6

1/28/2016

PresentationonDerridasTheGiftofDeath|Anundfrsich

innowayperturbedbythefactthat,becauseofthestructureofthelawsofthemarketthat
societyhasinstitutedandcontrols,becauseofthemechanismsofexternaldebtandother
comparableinequities,thatsamesocietyputstodeathor(butfailingtohelpsomeonein
distressaccountsonlyforaminordifference)allowstodieofhungeranddiseasetensof
millionsofchildrenwithoutanymoralorlegaltribunaleverbeingconsideredcompetentto
judgesuchasacrifice,thesacrificeoftheothertoavoidbeingsacrificedoneself.Notonlydoes
suchasocietyparticipateinthisincalculablesacrifice,itactuallyorganizesit.(86)
Beyondtheindividual,society,throughtheorganizingmechanismsofmarkets,debts,andother
structuralapparatuses,sacrificescountlessnumbersofothers.Thereligious,themoral,theethical,
thepolitical,allofthesearecaughtupinthesacrificiallogicthatworksonourbehalf.
CHRISTIANITY
Toclose,webrieflyturntothedebtthatisdistinctlyChristianity.KierkegaardChristianizesthe
sacrificeofIsaacthroughtheintroductionofatextfromtheGospelofMatthew:Forhe(Godthe
Father)seesinsecretandrecognizesdistressandcountsthetearsandforgetsnothing(quotedon
9495).Godssecretvisionintroducesaneconomyofsacrifice.IntheinstantthatAbrahammoves
toact,givingdeathtohisson,Godgivesback.WeknowfromDerridasGivenTimethatthegift,
inordertobeagift,cannotbecaughtupinanyeconomy.However,inreturningtoAbraham
thatwhichhehadgivenbeyondanypossibilityofexchange,theFatherbringseconomybackin
throughthebackdoor.Or,infollowingtheMattheantext,wemightsaythatGodreinscribes
economybyheart.TheChristianGodisonewhosesecrecytransportstheterrestrialeconomyto
thecelestial.Thekingdomofheavenisaplaceofsecretrewardforsecretdeedsofjustice,astark
comparisonfromtheJewishleaderswhosejusticepertainstotheletter,thatis,thebody.Eventhe
Mattheancommandmenttoloveyourenemies,whichSchmittdisregardsonphilological
groundsasirrelevantfriend/enemydistinctionthatundergirdsTheConceptofthePolitical,is
followedupwithapromiseofreward.Ofcourse,DerridadeconstructsSchmittsneatdelineation
betweentheprivateandthepublicsphere.However,henotesthegospeltextspromisethatthe
salaryofrevengeissupersededbytheremunerationoftheFathersreward.
IfGodtheFathergivesbirthtoasecreteconomy,theapotheosisofthislogicwasalready
discoveredbyNietzsche.CitingNietzschescommentintheGenealogyofMoralsonChristianitys
strokeofgenius,DerridastatesthatChristianitysrelationtoitself,itsselfaffirmationorself
presentation,itsbeingself,isconstitutedinthehyperboleofthis[secret,divine]market,inthe
visibilityoftheinvisibleheart(109).Christianity,especiallywhenitcomesundercritique,byits
owninternallogicradicallyreaffirmsitself.EverydemystificationofChristianitysubmitsagain
andagaintojustifyingaprotoChristianitytocome(109).Itisnothardtoseetowhomthislogic
hasbeenlent:selfreproducingcapital.InChristianity,Godsacrificeshimselfforhisowndebtors.
Nietzscheaskswouldyoubelieve[literally:credit]it?
PostedinDerrida.5Comments

5ResponsestoPresentationonDerridasTheGiftofDeath
KeithWittySays:

https://itself.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/presentationonderridasthegiftofdeath/

5/6

1/28/2016

PresentationonDerridasTheGiftofDeath|Anundfrsich

KeithWittySays:
Wednesday,February19,2014at11:05am
Thisisexcellentstuff.
AdamKotskoSays:
Thursday,February20,2014at6:12am
(IliketheonewordimplicitcritiqueofCaputo.)
AdamKotskoSays:
Thursday,February20,2014at6:16am
(Also,thisiskindofofftopic,butmyfavoriteartisticrepresentationofthesacrificeofIsaacis
Caravaggios.)
StephenKeatingSays:
Thursday,February20,2014at8:20am
IvealwayswonderedaboutthesemipublicsettingofCaravaggiosversion.Theresalsothe
waythatAbrahamlooksannoyedthathesbeinginterrupted.
StephenKeatingSays:
Thursday,February20,2014at8:25am
Astotheotherthing,IhaventreadCaputosInsistence,butafterthisreadingofGiftofDeath,
myimpressionwasmorelessthatDerridaisarguingthatyoucancallthetoutautreGodif
youwant,butcertainlynotGodtheFather.
Commentsareclosed.
Justalittledifferent
Enjoyyourcreepiness!
CreateafreewebsiteorblogatWordPress.com.|TheGarlandTheme.

https://itself.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/presentationonderridasthegiftofdeath/

6/6