This movement of analytic abstraction in the circulation of arbitrary signs is quite parallel to that within which money is constituted. Money replaces things by their signs, not only within a society but from one culture to another, or from one economic organization to another. That is why the alphabet is commercial, a trader. It must be understood within the monetary moment of economic rationality. The critical description of money is the faithful reflection of the discourse on writing. In both cases an anonymous supplement is substituted for the thing. Just as the concept retains only the comparable element of diverse things, just as money gives the “common measure” to incommensurable objetcs in order to constitute them into merchandise, so alphabetic writing transcribes heterogeneous signifieds within a system of arbitrary and common signifiers: the living languages. It thus opens an aggression against the life that it makes circulate. If “the sign has led to the neglect of the thing signified,” as Emile says speaking of money, then the forgetfulness of things is greatest in the usage of those perfectly abstract and arbitrary signs that are money and phonetic writing.
✖ Via Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology, tr. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, JHU Press, [1967]1998, p. 300 (French : éd. Minuit, Paris, 1967, p. 424-425).

• Jun 03, 2009 link notes tagged: philosophy  language  book  author  money  capitalism  sign 

skandalon


1 2



APHELIS / ARCHIVE / RSS / CONTACT / Theme based on D&D