Editing Binary opposition (section)

== Theory of binaries ==
A classic example of binary opposition is the presence-absence dichotomy. According to [[structuralism]], distinguishing between [[Existence|presence]] and [[Nonexistence|absence]], viewed as polar opposites, is a fundamental element of thought in many cultures. In addition, according to post-structuralist criticisms, ''presence'' occupies a position of dominance in human society over ''absence'', because ''absence'' is traditionally seen as what you get when you take away ''presence''. (Were ''absence'' dominant, ''presence'' might have most traditionally been seen as what you get when you take away ''absence''.)<ref>Britannica 2011, Binary opposition, viewed 9 March 2011, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/65552/binary-opposition</ref>

According to [[Jacques Derrida]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Derrida |first=Jacques |year=1992 |title=Positions |page=41}}</ref> meaning is often defined in terms of binary oppositions, where "one of the two terms governs the other." 

An example of binary opposition is the male-female dichotomy. A post-structuralist view is that ''[[male]]'' can be seen, according to traditional thought, as dominant over ''[[female]]'' because ''male'' is the presence of a [[phallus]], while the [[vagina]] is an absence or loss. American philosopher [[John Searle]] has suggested that the concept of binary oppositions—as taught and practiced by postmodernists and poststructuralists—is specious and lacking in rigor.<ref>In [http://free--expression.blogspot.com/2007/10/john-searle-on-derrida.html 1983], Searle reviewed Johnathan Culler's ''On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism'' for the [[New York Review of Books]], writing,
: "In Culler's book, we get the following examples of knowledge and mastery [attained from analysis of binary opposites and deconstruction]: speech is a form of writing ([[passim]]), presence is a certain type of absence (p. 106), the marginal is in fact central (p. 140), the literal is metaphorical (p. 148), truth is a kind of fiction (p. 181), reading is a form of misreading (p. 176), understanding is a form of misunderstanding (p. 176), sanity is a kind of neurosis (p. 160), and man is a form of a woman (p. 171). Some readers may feel that such a list generates not so many feelings of mastery as of monotony. There is in deconstructive writing a constant straining of the prose to attain something that sounds profound by giving it the air of a [[paradox]], e.g., "truths are fictions whose fictionality has been forgotten" (p. 181).</ref>