Changes

:Fair enough? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] ^{[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]} 06:52, 25 February 2008 (EST)

:Fair enough? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] ^{[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]} 06:52, 25 February 2008 (EST)

::What the article describes is the alternative... and in fact, not recognizable as deconstruction at all.  Consider Bressler's '''Literary Criticism''', one of the better introductions to the field:

::What the article describes is the alternative... and in fact, not recognizable as deconstruction at all.  Consider Bressler's '''Literary Criticism''', one of the better introductions to the field:

"...Disavowing the existence of a transcendental signified, deconstruction questioned Western humanity's proclivity toward logocentrism."  This article mentions none of the key concepts involved in the topic, such as supplementation or differance (not a misspelling).

::"...Disavowing the existence of a transcendental signified, deconstruction questioned Western humanity's proclivity toward logocentrism."  This article mentions none of the key concepts involved in the topic, such as supplementation or differance (not a misspelling).

::I have removed the "personal remark" left by my other account above, in accordance with your apparent wishes (since you already edited it out of my words, something I find very presumptuous), but I assure you that even a little investigation will reveal that the current article has very little to do with Derrida's deconstruction.  Any article on the topic that does not even tangentially mention the foundations of the approach (the privileged binaries of language, the historical prejudice towards speech over writing, the centristic analyses) is nothing but misinformation.  A stub would be better, or a direct copy from an open-source encyclopedia.

::I have removed the "personal remark" left by my other account above, in accordance with your apparent wishes (since you already edited it out of my words, something I find very presumptuous), but I assure you that even a little investigation will reveal that the current article has very little to do with Derrida's deconstruction.  Any article on the topic that does not even tangentially mention the foundations of the approach (the privileged binaries of language, the historical prejudice towards speech over writing, the centristic analyses) is nothing but misinformation.  A stub would be better, or a direct copy from an open-source encyclopedia.

::I dislike this echo chamber very much, but please fix this nonsense.  It is almost painful to see it and think that some home-schooled child might think that deconstruction is the "the postmodern or liberal belief that each person interprets a text in light of their own experiences, biases, and prejudices."--[[User:TomMoore|TomMoore]] 17:17, 27 February 2008 (EST)

::I dislike this echo chamber very much, but please fix this nonsense.  It is almost painful to see it and think that some home-schooled child might think that deconstruction is the "the postmodern or liberal belief that each person interprets a text in light of their own experiences, biases, and prejudices."--[[User:TomMoore|TomMoore]] 17:17, 27 February 2008 (EST)