An alterable context is the very condition of possibility for every mark

Evidence

In “Limited Inc.,” Derrida points out that Searle resolutely refuses to see that the former is attempting to rewrite the opposition Speech-Writing through what I shall call an ideology critique (although Derrida would object to that phrase and call his critique ethico-political) of the interest of such an opposition. Among other things, Searle sees writing as transcription of speech, and sees text and (oral) context as distinct and different, whereas Derrida demonstrates that the principle of an undecidable and/or alterable (to the point of rupture) context is the condition of possibility of every mark, written or spoken. — Donna Landry and Gerald MacLean, The Spivak Reader, 672

Categorization

• XREF: The ‘rupturable context as condition of possibility’ tracks Derrida’s undecidability theme that elsewhere underpins Spivak’s account of how strategic essentialism might be held without being believed — the fixed identity is not a self-present origin but a re-citable mark. — connects to: Object permanence derives from finite future potentiality, not infinite time — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 606; Specific meaning arises only from an arbitrary contingent break; Every decision permanently shapes the context of later decisions — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 567

Broader Connections

• Every decision permanently shapes the context of later decisions #expands (0.82) — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 567
• Specific meaning arises only from an arbitrary contingent break #qualifies (0.80)
• Object permanence derives from finite future potentiality, not infinite time #complicates (0.75) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 606