Virginia Woolf's Theory Of Criticism, Poststructuralism And Deconstructionism

In his 1971 paper “Personal Identity”, Derek Parfit posits that it is possible and indeed desirable to free important questions from presuppositions about personal identity without losing all that matters. In working out how to do so, Parfit comes to the conclusion that “the question about identity has no importance” (Parfit, 1971, p. 4.2:3). In this essay, I will attempt to show that Parfit’s thesis is a valid one, with positive implications for human behaviour. The first section of the essay will examine the thesis in further detail and the second will assess how Parfit’s claims fare in the face of criticism.

The purpose of this essay is to define what Personal Identity is by analyzing John Locke’s argument for Personal Identity. John Locke’s argument for Personal Identity will be examined, in order to establish a better understanding of whether or not the argument for personal identity could be embraced. In order to do so, the essay will i) State and explain Locke’s argument that we are not substances or mere souls and ii) State and explain Locke’s concept of personal identity and its relations to what he calls self, consciousness and punishment. This essay will also focus on Thomas Reid’s perspective on personal identity and iii) State and explain Reid’s criticisms of Locke’s theory of personal identity, and lastly iv) I will evaluate whether or not Reid’s objections are good. Locke’s argument may seem to be plausible at first, however, the essay will conclude by rejecting John Locke’s argument for personal identity due to Locke’s inadequate reasonings and Thomas Reid’s criticisms.

To the ignorant and self-oblivious person, the true individuality of a man’s self is presumed through his ability to possess an apt and socially preferable state of mind. Quite ironic in fact—and if I’m not mistaken—the widespread consensus regarding human identity, is that it is at its most ripe, and fertile upon one’s inevitable decision to conform to the mass. Such logic is somewhat of a paradox-in-itself and if we deconstruct the meaning of the terms ‘conform’ and ‘individuality’ their contrast is vast, and their apparent use is irrational, therefore all aspects of the human mind remain complacent, and mundane to a certain degree that it erases any former beliefs of a unique human being. Rather, human personality is an

Power Struggles are very common is many marriages. In Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, by Edward Albee, the relationship or marriage between George and Martha is based in power. The power struggle between George and Martha has become the basis of their relationship. Their love has turned into hate. The only connection they have is through their insults and the series of games they play. The power struggle between George and Martha develops is reveled and is resolved through out the play.

The world has become modern and global. Identification of the self is a complicated, though, an important problem of every individual. Self- identity is based on inner values and reflections on culture, politics and social interactions. The main point is that people label themselves to any particular group in the society (Worchel etc., 1998). According to Ferguson: “Identity commonly refers to which it makes, or is thought to make

In every person, an ego which interacts with the world appears to exist; hence, languages use the basic pronouns, “I” and “you.” However, what can one truly classify as the self? Cognitive scientist Bruce Hood defines an illusion as, “[the] experience of something that is not what it seems.” By this definition, he classifies the self as illusory; humans naturally experience their self, but it does not actually exist. Similarly, in Pablo Neruda’s The Egoist, Neruda contrasts the ego with the natural world, deeming abandoning one’s self a necessary step to obtain lasting satisfaction with existence. Neruda conveys his idea as a physician would a diagnosis; first identifying the problem’s nature, then outlining its effects and solution.

Romantic innocence was replaced by realistic and knowledgeable concepts concerning the true reality of existence. The historical role of World War I leading up to modernism was that the world had never experienced the horrors of modern warfare, so society and literature as a result consciously transformed from the innocence of previous generations to the grotesque descriptions of reality as it had become.

My aim in this essay is to analyze in this order the ideas of personal identity, human nature, and reality. The following essays and films will be analyzed: "Divided Minds and the Nature of Persons", "The Selfish Cooperator", "Does the Real World Exist", Transfer, I Am and The Signal. In Derek Parfit 's "Divided Minds and the Nature of Persons", we learn that personal identity is ever changing, whereas in Richard Dawkin 's essay "The Selfish Cooperator" we are taught that human nature is circumstantial, and finally John Searle argues in "Does the Real World Exist" that reality exists and can be independent of us.

The 1960s were a volatile time and an important season of change in American history. The revolutions in social mores that the country experienced extended to the cinema. Previously, films sought the endorsement of production associations and religious organizations. That trend began to be challenged by bold directors and their films that earned success without the approval of these establishments. With its brash dialogue and suggestive situations, Mike Nichols’ screen adaptation of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? caused controversy by continuing the radical movements of films in the 50’s and 60’s, leading to content changes as well the advisory of who should see it. Along with other films that came before it, this led to the creation of the MPAA ratings system to classify films based on content.

In Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, Martha drinks and plays games to distract herself from her own feelings. Martha is the most important character who tries to avoid her flaws. She is afraid to live her life without illusions. Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? shows that people are afraid of exposing their own flaws and their own battle between fiction and reality. Instead, they expose others’ flaws to make themselves look better.

Despite the commonalities between the deconstructive and vitalist humanisms discussed in the previous section, there are some differences that can be deciphered between these two strands. First and foremost, both strands differ from an ontological standpoint. Whilst vitalist posthumanism has a comprehensible ontology, the deconstructive posthumanism are anti-ontological in their approach (Lorimer, 2009).

Jacques Lacan and Louis Althusser, post-structuralist philosophers and intellectual theorists, have expanded the confines of the human subject (Pauker). Addressing it from opposite academic disciplines they deal with many similar topics however expressed in different ways. As each independently discusses the self awareness of the human subject, many ties can be formed between these two theorists, both arguing that a subject is misrecognized and constructed differently to the traditional Cartesian Subject. Beginning with Lacan’s “The Mirror Stage,” he uses psychoanalysis to develop a new understanding of the intellectual development in babies, as he explains that when a child from six to eighteen months views itself in a mirror there is a “…transformation that takes place in the subject when he [sic] assumes an image” (Lacan 72). This transformation is the acknowledgement of the baby as a whole, instead of a “fragmented body,” here the baby sees itself apart from its mother and begins to view the world around them as an individual (Lacan 74). In Althusser’s “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses,” human subjectivity is formed through social interaction. Althusser uses the example of a policeman hailing an individual by saying, “Hey you there!” this recognition by the individual “…’transforms’ the individuals into subjects… by that very precise operation which I have called interpellation” (Althusser 55). It is evident through these broad summaries of Lacan’s and

In her essay ‘Modern Fiction’ Virginia Woolf provides an abstract analogy, in order to explain human existence, ‘Life is not a series of gig lamps symmetrically arranged; life is a luminous halo’. Despite Woolf's intentions being fixed in addressing the centric qualities of life, her comment unintentionally summons a suitable definition for the modernist movement. Modernism is comprehensive- it is a halo. A halo, comprised of many different sub-genres such as, Expressionism, Dadaism, and Vorticism, to mention but a few. This makes defining the movement, in short; arduous. However, Woolf’s metaphor of life as a halo mirrors modernism as her statement is as all-encompassing and open to interpretation as the movement itself. In addition to this, her comment also presents the reality of the modernist movement, for if her employment of life were to be replaced with modernism in her statement, it would still hold true. Modernism is not a series of gig lamps symmetrically arranged. It is instead a fluid movement which begs for symbolic interpretation. A necessity, provided by Woolf in her halo analogy. Despite the range of the movement and the diversity of its sub-genres, there are some discernible traits in the classic modernist text. The aim of this essay is to explore one of the primary traits of the modernist movement; symbolism. Modernist writers, T.S Eliot and Virginia Woolf both employed the practice of symbolism. Furthermore, the fundamental question of this essay with the

Both Structuralism and Post-Structuralism arise from Saussure’s linguistic theory and so, emphasize on language. In this way, there are identical. Moreover, both accept language as a system of signs that exists separately from any physical or mental reality. Similarly, Structuralism and Post-Structuralism will also together acknowledge that a subject is possible only through language. Hence, language overrides humans as the source of action and meaning and so, Structuralism and Post-Structuralism are non-humanistic [5]. Structuralism is deterministic as all power to structure one’s perceptions lie with the system. Hence, Structuralism is, in particular, anti-humanist

To get to the bottom of everything, the background knowledge must be built up before anything. The Modernist Period came to English Literature around the beginning of the twentieth century and marked its way with groundbreaking ways of viewing tradition and worldly views. A series of events would have been happening around this time to shape such views; one such event would be named the War to End All Wars. World War I had just broke out and continued to ravage Europe from the years 1914 through to 1918 and the horrors that happened during this war had shocked the people of that time greatly, which left such an impact on their lives. This in turn made the citizens question their humanity and what the world was becoming of, thus turning all the past beliefs and assurance in things like religion, politics, or society now no longer relevant since “ two world wars in the span of a generation [had] effectively shell-shocked all of Western civilization” (Rahn 1). Religion in the past provided the citizens coherency, guidance, and even insight into the human condition, but as times were changing it seemed as though religion was becoming to be replaced by art, literature, etc. Not all modernists rejected religion though, some stayed neutral and rather just questioned the beliefs and aspects of the past enlightenment thinkers. With the new and becoming age of the industrialized world, politics came to be ignored as well by the anti-conformists of the period, proving to be too