Either/or, like all binaries, depend on totalizing each element. Male/
Female, for instance. Derrida among others points out that
essentializing distorts. Male and female are more alike than not.
Derrida replaced duality with differance, which means more than the
Anglo word difference.
Post-Kantian philosophies are not dualistic. Except for Sartre who
didn't get it.
It seems clearer to use differance rather than a binary to express the
multiple choices you describe.
Sent from my iPod
On Jan 16, 2010, at 8:16 AM, Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]>
> Nancy Gish wrote:
>> Neither works if you try to follow it to any logical conclusion.
>> But then, as I said, I discuss this in the article on
>> "Subjectivities," which focuses on how Anglo-American and French
>> theories are set down on a template like Scottish poetry where they
>> just do not explain anything--one of them being these notions of
>> discourse as either totally originated by the lyric voice or
>> totally constructed by language. I never feel constrained by
>> "either/or"; it is pretty much always a false dichotomy.
> I had a friend who insisted that the meaning of either/or (in
> Kierkegaard no less) was "take your pick" or "six of one, half a
> dozen of the other"! False choices are false choices, between which
> one is not constrained to choose. But without arriving, somewhat
> regularly, at true either/or's, what progress does thought make?
> Ken A