26
thoroughly. It brought a number of indisputable benefits to people. Lower infant
mortality rate
, decreased death from starvation
, eradication of some of the fatal diseases, more equal treatment of people with different backgrounds and incomes,
and so on. To some, this is an indication of the potential of modernity, perhaps yet to be fully realized. In general, rational, scientific approach to problems and the
pursuit of economic wealth seems still too many a reasonable way of understanding good social development.
2.8 Deconstruction
Deconstruction is the name given by French philosopher Jacques
Derrida to an
approach whether in philosophy, literary analysis, or in other fields which rigorously pursues the meaning of a text to the point of undoing the oppositions
on which it is apparently founded, and to the point of showing that those foundations are irreducibly complex, unstable or, indeed, impossible from
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Derrida takes the word deconstruction from the work of Martin Heidegger.
In the summer of 1927, Martin Heidegger delivered a lecture course now published under the title, Basic Problems of Phenomenology. Given the topic of
his lectures, Heidegger appropriately begins them with a discussion of the nature of philosophy and, particularly of the philosophical movement called
phenomenology. Borrowing creatively from his teacher, Edmund Husserl, Heidegger says that phenomenology is the name for a method of doing
philosophy; he says that the method includes three steps -- reduction,
27
construction, and destruction -- and he explains that these three are mutually pertinent to one another. Construction necessarily involves destruction, he says,
and then he identifies destruction with deconstruction, Abbau 20-23. Heidegger explains what he means by philosophical destruction by using an ordinary
German word that we can translate literally unbuild Deconstruction by James E.
Faulconer In 1959 Derrida asks the question: must not structure have a genesis, and
must not the origin, the point of genesis, be already structured, in order to be the genesis of something Jacques Derrida, ‘Genesis and Structure and
Phenomenology, in Writing and Difference London: Routledge In other words, every structural or synchronic phenomenon has a history, and the structure
cannot be understood without understanding its genesis Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences. At the same time, in order that there
be movement, or potential, the origin cannot be some pure unity or simplicity, but must already be articulated—complex—such that from it a diachronic process
can emerge. This original complexity must not be understood as an original positing, but more like a default of origin, which Derrida refers to as iterability,
inscription, or textuality Cf., Derrida, Positions Chicago London: University of Chicago Press, 1981, pp. 95–6. It is this thought of originary complexity,
rather than original purity, which destabilizes the thought of both genesis and structure, that sets Derridas work in motion, and from which derive all of its
terms, including deconstruction On this destabilization of both genesis and
28
structure, cf., Rodolphe
Gasché , The Tain of the Mirror Cambridge,
Massachusetts, London: Harvard University Press, 1986, p. 146 Derridas method consisted in demonstrating all the forms and varieties of
this originary complexity, and their multiple consequences in many fields. His way of achieving this was by conducting thorough, careful, sensitive, and yet
transformational readings of philosophical and literary texts, with an ear to what in those texts runs counter to their apparent systematicity structural unity or
intended sense authorial genesis. By demonstrating the aporias
and ellipses of thought, Derrida hoped to show the infinitely subtle ways that this originary
complexity, which by definition cannot ever be completely known, works its structuring and destructuring effects Cf., Rodolphe Gasché, Infrastructures and
Systematicity, in John
Sallis ed., Deconstruction and Philosophy Chicago
London: University of Chicago Press, 1987, pp. 3–4 Derrida initially resisted granting to his approach the overarching name
deconstruction, on the grounds that it was a precise technical term that could not be used to characterize his work generally. Nevertheless, he eventually accepted
that the term had come into common use to refer to his textual approach, and Derrida himself increasingly began to use the term in this more general way.
The only way to understand the meaning of deconstruction meaning is to deconstruct the assumptions and knowledge systems which produce the illusion of
singular meaning Pengantar Ilmu Kebudayaan, Yan Mujiyanto.This act of deconstruction illuminates such as; how can taboo things can be acceptable, how
can female become male, how can good thing become bad things and etc.
29
BAB III METHODOLOGY
The research methodologies are divided into several parts, the first is the object of the study. The second presents the sources of data. The third presents the type of
data. The fourth explains the technique of collecting data. The fifth explains the technique of analyzing data.
3.1 Object of the study
