Jacques Derrida, in an interview entitled "Afterword: Toward an Ethic of Discussion" suggest that in order to discuss a work, one has a responsibility to actually read it. This might appear to be de minimis, but it is shocking (to Derrida, and also to myself) to see how many statements have been made concerning his work (in journalistic articles, for example) by people who have plainly not read the texts in question-- or read them so poorly as to amount to the same thing.
If we broaden this a bit, I think we can say that while a reader is not morally bound by an author's intentions (to the extent that they are recoverable), at the same time, it is the responsibility of the reader to at least be aware of them (to the extent that they are recoverable).
manpreet![Tuteehub forum best answer]()
Best Answer
2 years ago
Are there any obligations a reader">reader (of any form of text) has to fulfill towards the author?
Which philosophers argue within this context?
Example:
Is there anyone arguing, a reader">reader must / should (not) read the end of a thriller at first to see how the plot is ending?