Locke vs Derrida

In two essays, by John Locke and Jaques Derrida, the authors analyze the purpose and meaning of words. They describe how words are understood and interpreted in different ways, creating complexity and confusion in language.

In "From An Essay Concerning Human Understanding," Locke focuses primarily on the imperfection of words. He explains how without experiencing something first-hand someone has no way of knowing what the word truly means and that many different definitions can circulate for the same word and no one will ever know which is the absolute truth.

Derrida's idea of "differance," in his essay, “Différance,”  is a perfect example of Locke's theory. He describes "differance" as "neither a word nor concept," this is a definition that many individuals have a hard time grasping. Derrida seems to agree with Locke by encouraging his audience to look past just the definition of the word and view it as something more, something encompassing all of its meanings.

Both Locke and Derrida focus on the differences in language. Derrida is more concerned with how these differences make language, language. He explains how words are created to communicate with one another and without the differences between words we wouldn't have language as we do today. Locke has a really hard time with these differences, he sees different definitions as a challenge for communication. Locke explains how words are imperfect and language is flawed, but both share the common idea, that to truly understand a word, one must experience it. He uses the idea of a horse, how a person must rely on their own life experience of seeing, touching and hearing a horse in order to truly understand what "horse" means.

Works Cited

Derrida, Jacques. “Différance.” Literary Theory: An Anthology, Second Edition. Ed. Julie Rivkin and
Michael Ryan. Malden, MA: Wiley/Blackwell, 2004. 278-288.

Locke, John. “From An Essay Concerning Human Understanding.” The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present, Second Edition. Ed. Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg. New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001. 814-827.