A gift that truly gives must exceed every logic of conceptual appropriation

Evidence

Barth as he appears here is fundamentally much closer to Marion than to Hegel. He also would understand the gift as a ‘present’ which does not let itself be presented, as the promise of an event, as, in a word, a future. It emerges from the Barthian analysis that divine freedom must be conceived as an offering. Yet the possibility of freely giving to another would be completely covered over by the logic of dialectical assimilation and appropriation. — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 741

Categorization

• XREF: Malabou is mapping the anti-Hegelian line (Barth-Marion) that underpins later deconstruction of the gift; connects to reader’s continental theory frames of Derrida and Marion. — connects to: Deep gratitude rests on the awareness that a gift cannot be repaid — Georg Simmel, The Sociology of Georg Simmel, 9360; Genuine inspiration and care cannot be bought without being destroyed — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism, 69
• DEFINE: Contrast classically defines what a genuine gift means: un-presentable present, promise of an event, offering without recuperation.

Broader Connections

• Deep gratitude rests on the awareness that a gift cannot be repaid #corroborates (0.85) — Georg Simmel, The Sociology of Georg Simmel, 9360
• Genuine inspiration and care cannot be bought without being destroyed #corroborates (0.82) — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism, 69