Changes

[[Image:800px-Crop Book of Isaiah 2006-06-06.jpg|thumb|300px|The Holy Bible]]

[[Image:800px-Crop Book of Isaiah 2006-06-06.jpg|thumb|300px|The Holy Bible]]

:''Not to be confused with [[Reconstruction]].

:''Not to be confused with [[Reconstruction]].

'''Deconstruction''' is the [[postmodern]] or post-structuralist technique for language and literary analysis, created by French philosopher Jacques Derrida, that denies the existence of a single meaning behind a set of symbols, such as a sentence.  This is in contrast with most previous methods of understanding meanings, which assumed that there was a single concrete message intended by the author. The term is used in [[philosophy]], literary criticism, and the social sciences.  

'''Deconstruction''' is the [[postmodern]] or post-structuralist technique for language and literary analysis, created by French philosopher [[Jacques Derrida]], that denies the existence of a single meaning behind a set of symbols, such as a sentence.  This is in contrast with most previous methods of understanding meanings, which assumed that there was a single concrete message intended by the author. The term is used in [[philosophy]], literary criticism, and the social sciences.  

In pointing out that the manner in which symbols (or "signifiers") are understood is something that changes not only from culture to culture, but also person to person, deconstruction indicates that there is no essentially transcendental idea (or "signified") behind a symbol.<ref>Bressler, Charles.  ''Literary Criticism'' 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, Chicago, Illinois 2002) ISBN 978-0130333971.</ref>  This is sometimes interpreted as there being ''no'' meaning at all, but this is a common misunderstanding.  Further, some confuse deconstruction with another school of thought known as "reader response" criticism, in which emphasis is placed upon individual interpretation according to personal experiences.<ref>Noebel, David, ''Understanding the Times'' (Summit Ministries, Manitou Springs, Colorado 2006) ISBN 978-0936163000.</ref>  In deconstruction, an approach which derives mostly from linguistic analysis, Derrida pointed out that the "actual" signified of any given signifier was often "undecidable," or incapable of being given a single interpretation independent from the individual understanding it.  Derrida coined a number of the above terms, among others, to describe these phenomena.

In pointing out that the manner in which symbols (or "signifiers") are understood is something that changes not only from culture to culture, but also person to person, deconstruction indicates that there is no essentially transcendental idea (or "signified") behind a symbol.<ref>Bressler, Charles.  ''Literary Criticism'' 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, Chicago, Illinois 2002) ISBN 978-0130333971.</ref>  This is sometimes interpreted as there being ''no'' meaning at all, but this is a common misunderstanding.  Further, some confuse deconstruction with another school of thought known as "reader response" criticism, in which emphasis is placed upon individual interpretation according to personal experiences.<ref>Noebel, David, ''Understanding the Times'' (Summit Ministries, Manitou Springs, Colorado 2006) ISBN 978-0936163000.</ref>  In deconstruction, an approach which derives mostly from linguistic analysis, Derrida pointed out that the "actual" signified of any given signifier was often "undecidable," or incapable of being given a single interpretation independent from the individual understanding it.  Derrida coined a number of the above terms, among others, to describe these phenomena.

==Deconstruction in Other Areas==

==Deconstruction in Other Areas==

Deconstruction can be interpreted as hostile to [[Christianity]].  The [[Bible]] was written with specific meaning and concrete teachings. Christians seek to discover the meaning of God's Word, and apply the Bible's truths to their lives.

Deconstruction can be interpreted as hostile to [[Christianity]].  The [[Bible]] was written with specific meaning and concrete teachings. Christians seek to discover the meaning of God's Word, and apply the Bible's truths to their lives.  However, those who have decided they no longer agree with Biblical teaching (or, more accurately, the Biblical teaching of a specific branch of Christianity, such as [[Evangelical Christianity]]) and who have either left Christianity completely, or have embraced [[Liberal Christianity]], are said to have "deconstructed" their faith (the former may also be considered to have "deconverted").

[[Critical Legal Studies]] is deconstruction applied to [[Law]]. It involves dissecting and critiquing a law to find its subjective meaning, regardless of what it objectively states. Critical Legal Studies result in a view of law as tool to obtain what one wants. Susan Estich said, "You believe in principle; I believe in politics."<ref>Susan Estich in an online letter to Stuart Taylor Jr., www.slate.com/id/3628/entry/23734</ref> Deconstruction endangers law as we know it by rejecting standards of justice derived from religious moral absolutes and using law as a tool to beat political opponents into submission.<ref>Noebel, page 312</ref>

[[Critical Legal Studies]] is deconstruction applied to [[Law]]. It involves dissecting and critiquing a law to find its subjective meaning, regardless of what it objectively states. Critical Legal Studies result in a view of law as tool to obtain what one wants. Susan Estich said, "You believe in principle; I believe in politics."<ref>Susan Estich in an online letter to Stuart Taylor Jr., www.slate.com/id/3628/entry/23734</ref> Deconstruction endangers law as we know it by rejecting standards of justice derived from religious moral absolutes and using law as a tool to beat political opponents into submission.<ref>Noebel, page 312</ref>

"We now know -- or have no excuse for not knowing -- that deconstruction is not a technique or a method, and hence that there is no question of "applying" it. We know that it is not a moment of carnival or liberation, but a moment of the deepest concern with limits. We know that it is not a hymn to indeterminacy, or a life-imprisonment within language, or a denial of history: reference, mimesis, context, historicity, are among the most repeatedly emphasized and carefully scrutinized topics in Derrida's writing. And we know -- though this myth perhaps dies hardest of all -- that the ethical and the political are not avoided by deconstruction, but are implicated at every step." Derek Attridge.<ref>[http://www.brocku.ca/english/courses/4F70/deconstruction.php Deconstruction: Some Assumptions] Attridge, Derek, "Singularities, Responsibilities: Derrida, Deconstruction and Literary Criticism" in Critical Encounters: Reference and Responsibility in Deconstructive Writing ed. Cathy Caruth and Deborah Esch, pp 109-110</ref>

"We now know -- or have no excuse for not knowing -- that deconstruction is not a technique or a method, and hence that there is no question of "applying" it. We know that it is not a moment of carnival or liberation, but a moment of the deepest concern with limits. We know that it is not a hymn to indeterminacy, or a life-imprisonment within language, or a denial of history: reference, mimesis, context, historicity, are among the most repeatedly emphasized and carefully scrutinized topics in Derrida's writing. And we know -- though this myth perhaps dies hardest of all -- that the ethical and the political are not avoided by deconstruction, but are implicated at every step." Derek Attridge.<ref>[http://www.brocku.ca/english/courses/4F70/deconstruction.php Deconstruction: Some Assumptions] Attridge, Derek, "Singularities, Responsibilities: Derrida, Deconstruction and Literary Criticism" in Critical Encounters: Reference and Responsibility in Deconstructive Writing ed. Cathy Caruth and Deborah Esch, pp 109-110</ref>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

==See also==

==See also==

*[[Postmodernism]]

*[[Postmodernism]]