Must a sign be repeatable?

Abstract

This paper contests a point that Jacques Derrida and John Searle actually agree on, within their infamous debate: that a sign must be repeatable. I focus on a situation involving dissent when evaluating this claim.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

My notes

Similar books and articles

Pragmatical Paradox of Signature.Michaela Fiserova - 2018 - Signata 9 (1):485-504.
Photographic Art: An Ontology Fit to Print.Christy Mag Uidhir - 2012 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 70 (1):31-42.
Repeatable Miracles?Andrew Rein - 1986 - Analysis 46 (2):109 - 112.
The Ontology of Repeatable Artefacts.Geoff Michael John Stevenson - unknown
Language, philosophy and the risk of failure: Rereading the debate between Searle and Derrida. [REVIEW]Hagi Kenaan - 2002 - Continental Philosophy Review 35 (2):117-133.
Derrida e gli atti linguistici: oltre la polemica con Searle.Michele Gardini - 2002
Non-Repeatable Hedonism Is False.Travis Timmerman & Felipe Pereira - 2019 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 6:697-705.
What is it like to be a philosopher? Jacques Derrida, Gilles Deleuze, and nineteenth century British anthropology.Terence Rajivan Edward - manuscript
The Trespass of the Sign: Deconstruction, Theology, and Philosophy.Kevin Hart - 2000 - Fordham University Press.
The Pseudo-Metaphysics of the Sign.Guy Bouchard - 1983 - Semiotics:447-461.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-07-06

Downloads
379 (#80,041)

6 months
93 (#70,927)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Terence Rajivan Edward
University of Manchester (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Tacit consent and political obligation.A. John Simmons - 1976 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 5 (3):274-291.
Communication and Writing: A Public Language Argument.Simon Glendinning - 2000 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (1):271-286.

Add more references