poststructuralism


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Wikipedia.
Related to poststructuralism: postmodernism

poststructuralism:

see deconstructiondeconstruction,
in linguistics, philosophy, and literary theory, the exposure and undermining of the metaphysical assumptions involved in systematic attempts to ground knowledge, especially in academic disciplines such as structuralism and semiotics.
..... Click the link for more information.
.

poststructuralism

a widely influential intellectual movement in France from the 1960s onwards, deriving from STRUCTURALISM but reinterpreting the latter's main assumptions about LANGUAGE and society as signifying systems. As such, poststructuralists utilized while also challenging the ascendancy of key structuralist theorists including SAUSSURE and LÉVI-STRAUSS. In the course of a root-and-branch questioning of traditional modes of philosophical and linguistic theorizing, they also challenged other major social theories, notably MARXISM. The major theorists most usually associated with poststructuralism are DERRIDA and FOUCAULT (see also LACAN). Central aspects of previous linguistic theory ‘deconstructured’ by poststructuralism, especially by Derrida, include:
  1. a questioning of the implications of linguistic conceptions of DIFFERENCE, seen especially in Derrida's challenge to what he regards as SAUSSURE's still ‘metaphysical’ presuppositions about the SUBJECT and LANGUAGE, the priority given to speech‘ over ‘writing’ – see DECONSTRUCTION;
  2. a view that writing, too (see TEXTS), is also questionable as a source of any ‘grounding’ for objectivity or culture, the major reason for this being that, in addition to the ‘arbitrary’ connection between SIGNIFIER AND SIGNIFIED (as for Saussure), the relation between signifiers (via ‘differences’) is equally suspect, given that signifiers are always 'slipping under other signifiers‘, with no final definition possible.
References in periodicals archive ?
275) The problems with current formulations of poststructuralism become visible when one studies the empirical errors that have been committed in its name.
The Lacanian chapters conclude highlighting the "points of connections" between poststructuralism, Derrida and Lacan (151-2).
The process was also motivated by the attempt to come to terms with 'poststructuralism' in the very different works of Jean-Francois Lyotard, Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Derrida and the coterie of French feminist structuralists like Luce Irrigaray, Helene Cixious and others.
His poststructuralism driven more by Thom's and Mandlebrot's 'postmodern science' also provided the grounds for the critique of the knowledge/information economies at least in its neoliberal forms in terms of 'perfomativity' which was essential a second generation systems analysis based on an understanding of the spatialization of knowledge.
Thus, while Riley argues that poststructuralism owed much to a Durkheimian legacy, he posits a complex and contingent process of reconfiguration and transformation rather than simple continuity.
Despite its subject, Robert Young's Signs of Race in Poststructuralism: Toward a Transformative Theory of Race is hardly such a book: its breadth, depth and intended reach are bracing and invigorating.
This article extends these ideas by showing how feminist poststructuralism and queer theory are useful for understanding children's identity construction and transforming practice.
While there are moments in the book when the authors seem to speak too broadly about "poststructuralism" and "postcolonialism," they do not hesitate to engage with the work of some of the most influential and well-known feminist theorists of these perspectives, including Judith Butler, Gayatri Spivak, and Chandra Talpade Mohanty.
Although he admires poststructuralism and postanarchism, Newman is surprisingly critical of posthumanism, arguing that 'these developments should not be fetishised or seen as a form of liberation, as those harbingers of the "post-human" cyber age are wont to do' (43).
Moreover, the influence of Emmanuel Levinas on our understanding of these terms, particularly in the context of what some see as the ethical turn of poststructuralism in the 1980s, has been largely taken for granted.
Chapters 8 ('The Feminism Challenge') and 9 ('Postmodernism and Poststructuralism') are the two longest in the book.
Or a most radical hermeneutics--in the root sense which might still sound like an aporetic impossibility: that of a deepening of poststructuralism?