Thomas R. Thorp

Derrida, deconstruction, and postmodern discourses generally have been repeatedly attacked as politically impotent, or even harmful. Yet the charges rarely rise above the level of polemic. This is because the political critique leveled against deconstruction takes for granted exactly what Derrida challenges. The Modern/postmodern debate will remain fruitless until the received model of political theory opens itself up to an examination of the notion of reason it presupposes. The fundamental notion that reason is legitimate just in case it can account for itself immanently, employing only its own immanent standards and principles, is precisely the notion that needs to be examined. The dissertation investigates this notion of rational immanence as it is played out in the political critique of deconstruction, and as it functions in the work of Jurgen Habermas. I show that Habermas's notion of reason prevents him from achieving the political force he expects from his theory; and I argue that his theory requires a Derridean supplement: a deconstructive appropriation of the history of reason