意向历史性原解构主义批判之背后的预设--主体内在观念性与主体间观念性之间的融合

The Presupposition behind the Proto-Deconstructive Critique of Intentional Historicity: The Conflation of Intrasubjective and Intersubjective Idealities

德里达关注于胡塞尔意向性历史概念和实证历史概念之间的对立,他描述了属于理想含义观念性的这种历史性的解释,通过历史性的意义和历史性作为意义去探究观念性和历史性之间的对立。正是在意义历史性的唤醒和历史性意义的唤醒中,德里达观念性语言和经验主义语言的对立催生了他的"先验语言"概念,并在其终极目标中,将观念性的延异解释为显示。德里达将观念性之不可能的原因归之为理解起源的"他异性",他没有理解胡塞尔关于观念性起源问题的双重解释:主体间传统的客观性和理想对象本体论意义的客观性,因此,导致了对胡塞尔的误解,也正是在这种误解中,观念性的起点问题被融入到主体间传统的客体性起源问题,在此导致了德里达的崩溃。

Jacques Derrida focuses on opposing of Husserl＇s concept of intentional history to empirical history. He characterizes this account of the historicity belonging to the ideality of ideal meaning, and explores the opposition of ideality and histority by exploring the meaning of historicity and historicity as meaning. It is in the awakening of the historicity of meaning and the meaning of its very historicity, Derrida＇s opposition of the ideality language and the empiricality language yields his concept of ＂transcendental language＂, and in the infinite telos, he accounts the deferral of ideality as manifest. Derrida attributes the reason of impossibility of ideality to apprehending the ＂alterity＂of its origin, he doesn＇t understand Husserls twofold account of the problem of the origin of ideality： the objectivity of an intersubjective tradition and the objectivity of ideal object＇s to Derrida＇s collapse.