After reading Derrida‘s “Structure, Sign and Play” I was completely lost. During the past two class periods we discussed the reading and it answered some questions for me but also raised many. I believe that this is the point of the class and discussions between blogs. This main goal is to give an overall understanding of others views on the topic which is on hand and most importantly help work through any problems people might have.
I found the most interesting topic of the Derrida reading to be the nature / culture opposition. He then goes on to call this a stabilizing force. He steps out of culture to view it from above and believes that some things are natural and some cultural. The natural things are shared between many different cultures. They are universal in a way. The cultural are specific to certain cultures. They make cultures unique and differ from one another.
Many issues are shared to be immoral in many cultures. Levi Strauss says that if the action is bad in both universal and cultural then it is a scandal. This is where the idea of “incest taboo” comes into play. In just about every culture, people believe that sleeping with a relative is wrong and immoral.
This makes the incest taboo universal, in a sense. Strauss states that the only way that there can be a scandle is if one believes in the difference between nature and culture. People know that it is inherently bad to sleep with their relatives some choose to do it anyway. This brings me into the concept of social norms in nature and culture. In a way, social norms are the building block of cultures just like atoms are the building blocks of matter. So do the problems not lie in the culture but in the social norms? Since we all know that incest is wrong, what actually makes it wrong? This is all due to the concept of social norms and the role they form on culture.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
i am thinking to much about this maybe...I am not sure.
Nature- way of the world, culture-built upon nature. How does incest taboo relate to this idea of nature/ culture. Is it that the incest taboo is a taboo because cutturally we say it is, even though it is human to want that human contact (maybe not with the family but with others...and i say this becuase i have been taught to see incest as wrong). Its taboo becuase of this idea of play- that something that exists before the structure in which disrupts the presence but at the same time (as I see it) it creates a presents. So is incest taboo as sort of cultural conditioning?
i agree with the incest taboo being a sort of cultural conditioning. we are all taught it is wrong. it is obviously something not to do, we have proof of why but usually before we see the proof we have the idea in our head that its wrong. But Strauss' idea of ethnology is allowed because of this nature/culture idea. he feels nature is present and culture is absent. culture is built upon nature. so strauss i feel would not see the incest taboo as a cultural conditioning because he sees culture as absent. Strauss is not looking for a source.
Post a Comment