The document discusses the concept of structuralism and the center or origin of meaning. It suggests that the desire for coherence creates a central meaning or signifier around which other meanings are organized. However, this center is not stable or fixed - it can be substituted over time, as seen in shifts from concepts like God to rationality to the irrational unconscious. As a result, there can be no single transcendental signifier, and meaning exists in infinite play and flux without stability. The document advocates continued deconstruction of meaning systems while recognizing that such deconstruction still relies on the existing systems.

1. Perhaps structurality

2. Perhaps structurality COHERENCE

3. Perhaps structurality COHERENCE

4. Perhaps structurality COHERENCE

5. Perhaps the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) structurality COHERENCE

6. Perhaps The center as cause is both within and outside the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) structurality COHERENCE

7. Perhaps The center as cause is both within and outside Center as function means that it is both the center and not the center the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) structurality COHERENCE

8. Perhaps The center as cause is both within and outside Center as function means that it is both the center and not the center the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) so there can be no “transcendental signifier” structurality COHERENCE

9. Perhaps …stability of meaning is destroyed The center as cause is both within and outside Center as function means that it is both the center and not the center the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) so there can be no “transcendental signifier” structurality PLAY Infinite play of signification

10. Perhaps …stability of meaning is destroyed The center as cause is both within and outside Center as function means that it is both the center and not the center the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) so there can be no “transcendental signifier” structurality PLAY Infinite play of signification Deconstruct!

11. Perhaps …stability of meaning is destroyed The center as cause is both within and outside Center as function means that it is both the center and not the center the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) so there can be no “transcendental signifier” structurality Infinite play of signification Oh, but…each deconstruction of a SYSTEM depends on that SYSTEM… Deconstruct!

12. Perhaps …stability of meaning is destroyed The center as cause is both within and outside Center as function means that it is both the center and not the center the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) so there can be no “transcendental signifier” structurality COHERENCE Infinite play of signification Just keep alert! And deconstruct on! Oh, but…each deconstruction of a SYSTEM depends on that SYSTEM… Deconstruct!

13. Perhaps …stability of meaning is destroyed The center as cause is both within and outside Center as function means that it is both the center and not the center the desire for coherence creates a center Substitutions of the center as history of meaning (Godrationalityirration-al unconscious) so there can be no “transcendental signifier” structurality PLAY Infinite play of signification Just keep alert! And deconstruct on! Oh, but…each deconstruction of a SYSTEM depends on that SYSTEM… Deconstruct!