Douglas L. Donkel

This study examines the complex relationship between Martin Heidegger's concept of Difference and Jacques Derrida's neologism "Differance" in light of the problem of Being. Set in a theological context, it argues that Derrida's reflections call into question Heidegger's account of Difference, thus problematizing the "Seinsfrage" and forestalling any theological appropriation of Being. Further, it argues that Derrida's discourse on "Differance" is itself paradoxical, indicating its status is logically undecidable. Inspired by Heidegger's charge to think the Difference, this work characterizes Derrida's thought as a response to this mandate, and takes as its own task the further thinking through of the problematics of Difference in these thinkers."

In this study, I offer an account of the relationship between Heidegger's notion of difference and Derrida's notion of differance in light of the question of Being. I argue that, while Derrida's account of differance calls into question Heidegger's characterization of difference as that which allows for presence, this same account calls itself into question as well, that is, in the manner of the liar paradox--if it is true, it is false--which is just to say it is undecidable in the Derridian sense of the term. I come to these conclusions through a close reading of Heidegger's Identity and Difference and Derrida's Speech and Phenomena, where I uncover a motif of external and internal relations which I employ in contrasting difference and differance. ;In addition, this study is concerned with the doctrine of God, a doctrine which I suggest is closely related to Heidegger's question of Being insofar as both attempt to account for the genesis of things. I argue that, while Heidegger's account undercuts traditional theism, the problematization of the question of Being by virtue of differance suggests that the theological project, insofar as it involves giving an account of the absolute, i.e., God, has likewise been called into question. I suggest further that this situation indicates the need to redirect the concerns of theology toward interpersonal and social issues, and that this move does not set a precedent insofar as certain Western and Eastern approaches have always valued releasement from doctrinal attachments as a way to encourage the best in human relations