/lit/ - Literature

>>14120680
The avoidance of violence.
I'm not seeing where the paradox is there. It doesn't seem like he's talking about a strict paradox because he doesn't seem to problematize ostensives in general. I guess he means there is always a residue of possibility of the signified, confusion is always a possibility. But I distrust his motives and he may be being deliberately sophistical by blowing this into something more quasi-Derridean. But he seems less concerned with "writing" and that. A sign doesn't obliterate or defer indefinitely our reference to an object. It enables it, which allows for confusion and misuse. I'm afraid I'm not French enough to wring my hands here. More fundamental I would consider pic related, for example. Though I'm not so Kant-sympathetic.