Skip to main content
Philosophy

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

17
  • You can see U.Eco, Interpretation and Overinterpretation (1992).
    – Mauro ALLEGRANZA
    Commented Jul 10, 2017 at 12:32
  • Obviously Kripke is not a deconstructionist but if you are focusing on the idea of "possible interpretations being as valid as actual interpretations" then his comments on Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations comes to mind. The rule following paradox that Kripke outlines is agreed upon that neither Kripke nor Wittgenstein believe it themselves and is often attributed to a third, fake person called "Kripenstein." I don't think I would truly call this literary deconstructionism, but it does fit your definition.
    – Not_Here
    Commented Jul 10, 2017 at 12:40
  • isn't Derrida the godfather of pretty much all deconstructionisms?
    – user20153
    Commented Jul 10, 2017 at 17:18
  • 1
    @Not_Here Yes, that's exactly it, I'd not thought of that. Your comment would make a perfectly satisfactory answer.
    – user22791
    Commented Jul 11, 2017 at 6:48
  • 1
    @idiotan He's a professor of English Literature, whilst that doesn't preclude pretension, I think it more likely he used the term "deconstructionism" because it's a term he uses accurately and appropriately on a day-to-day basis.
    – user22791
    Commented Jul 11, 2017 at 7:43