Reviews
There are almost no other studies of this controversy either in France or in the United States; at least, there is no other book that I know about on this topic. The dialogue between Searle and Derrida concerning Austin's theory on the "performative" or "speech acts" has been, as it were, resurrected by Moati -- and it is fascinating. By focusing so strictly on a limited series of polemical texts, Moati does more than provide a subtle explanation of the historical divergence between Austin, Searle and Derrida, he allows us to understand the very roots of a lasting misunderstanding between Anglo-American language philosophy and continental traditions of phenomenology., There are almost no other studies of this controversy either in France or in the United States; at least, there is no other book that I know about on this topic. The dialogue between Searle and Derrida concerning Austin's theory on the 'performative' or 'speech acts' has been, as it were, resurrected by Moati -- and it is fascinating. By focusing so strictly on a limited series of polemical texts, Moati does more than provide a subtle explanation of the historical divergence between Austin, Searle, and Derrida, he allows us to understand the very roots of a lasting misunderstanding between Anglo-American language philosophy and continental traditions of phenomenology., A very brilliant reconstruction of the philosophical clash between two prominent giants of Continental and American Philosophies., In its very violence, the debate between Jacques Derrida and John Searle was the proof of the gap that continues to separate the continental speculative tradition from its Anglo-Saxon analytic counterpart. Raoul Moati's book is much more than a review of the debate-he is part of the debate, bringing it to its philosophical conclusion. Sometimes, while reading his book, one has the feeling that Derrida and Searle engaged in their debate so that Moati could write his book on them, in the same way that, for Hegel, the Peloponnesian War was fought so that Thucydides could write his classic book on it., There are almost no other studies of this controversy either in France or in the United States; at least, there is no other book that I know about on this topic. The dialogue between Searle and Derrida concerning Austin's theory on the 'performative' or 'speech acts' has been, as it were, resurrected by Moati--and it is fascinating. By focusing so strictly on a limited series of polemical texts, Moati does more than provide a subtle explanation of the historical divergence between Austin, Searle, and Derrida, he allows us to understand the very roots of a lasting misunderstanding between Anglo-American language philosophy and continental traditions of phenomenology., Moati's work is a real breakthrough. He helps us make sense of the very distinction between so-called analytic and continental philosophies. The exceptional clarity of his style, the accuracy of his analyses shed a completely new light on both authors and the nature of their quarrel. He provides deep insight into Derrida's view and Searle's, addressing their common presuppositions. The outcome of such an unbiased approach is a completely new understanding of the contemporary philosophical landscape. It will prove helpful for philosophers of language and mind, as well as for metaphysicians, and for everyone who wants to understand the big philosophical divide that has characterized the past fifty years., A very brilliant reconstruction of the philosophical clash between two prominent giants of continental and American philosophies., Derrida and Searle's confrontation divided once and for all philosophical debate and division with consequences that probably surpassed both masters' predictions. The fact that this debate never took place (considering that Searle and Derrida never met personally and the former also refused to reprint one of his responses in an edited collection) makes Moati's text particularly useful in reconstructing the history of this famous dispute., In its very violence, the debate between Jacques Derrida and John Searle was the proof of the gap that continues to separate the continental speculative tradition from its Anglo-Saxon analytic counterpart. Moati's book is much more than a review of the debate - he is part of the debate, bringing it to its philosophical conclusion. Sometimes, while reading his book, one has the feeling that Derrida and Searle engaged in their debate so that Moati could write his book on them, in the same way that, for Hegel, the Peloponesian war was fought so that Thucydides could write his classic book on it., There are almost no other studies of this controversy either in France or in the United States; at least, there is no other book that I know about on this topic. The dialogue between Searle and Derrida concerning Austin's theory on the 'performative' or 'speech acts' has been, as it were, resurrected by Moati-and it is fascinating. By focusing so strictly on a limited series of polemical texts, Moati does more than provide a subtle explanation of the historical divergence between Austin, Searle, and Derrida, he allows us to understand the very roots of a lasting misunderstanding between Anglo-American language philosophy and continental traditions of phenomenology., Moati's work is a real breakthrough. He provides us with anilluminating analysis of the pivotal controversy between Derrida andSearle. Thus, he helps us make sense of the very distinction betweenso-called 'Analytic' and 'Continental' philosophies. The exceptionalclarity of his style, the accuracy of his analyses shed a completelynew light on both authors and on the nature of their quarrel. Thebalance of his position is impressive, as he gives us a deep insightinto Derrida's view as to Searle's as well, addressing their commonpresuppositions. The outcome of such unbiased approach is a completelynew understanding of the contemporary philosophical landscape. It willprove helpful for the philosophers of language and mind, as well asfor the metaphysicians, and for everyone who wants to understandanything of the big philosophical divide that has been characteristicof the last fifty years., In its very violence, the debate between Jacques Derrida and John Searle was the proof of the gap that continues to separate the continental speculative tradition from its Anglo-Saxon analytic counterpart. Raoul Moati's book is much more than a review of the debate--he is part of the debate, bringing it to its philosophical conclusion. Sometimes, while reading his book, one has the feeling that Derrida and Searle engaged in their debate so that Moati could write his book on them, in the same way that, for Hegel, the Peloponnesian War was fought so that Thucydides could write his classic book on it., In its very violence, the debate between Jacques Derrida and John Searle was the proof of the gap that continues to separate the continental speculative tradition from its Anglo-Saxon analytic counterpart. Raoul Moati's book is much more than a review of the debate -- he is part of the debate, bringing it to its philosophical conclusion. Sometimes, while reading his book, one has the feeling that Derrida and Searle engaged in their debate so that Moati could write his book on them, in the same way that, for Hegel, the Peloponnesian War was fought so that Thucydides could write his classic book on it., Although someone could object that Heidegger and Carnap's violent exchange in the thirties actually anticipated philosophical debate and division, it is Derrida and Searle's confrontation which divided once and for all both trends with consequences that probably surpassed both masters' predictions. The fact that this debate never took place (considering the Searle and Derrida never met personally and the former also refused to reprint one of his responses in an edited collection), as well as the fact that there are so few books on this subject, makes Moati's text particularly useful to reconstruct the history of this famous dispute.
