عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]چکیده [English]
Plato, in the Phaedrus dialogue , has counted writing in the margin, with emphasis on the logocentric speech. He presents writing as a dangerous supplement for alive speech that is predicated of the meaning and the truth. referring to "the logic of Supplementary", J. Derrida knows writing's inferiority in Platonic tradition, as an unjustifiable matter. Through the logic of difference ,he considers to the meaning as always deferred and different matter. the logic of Supplementary that has been borrowed from J. J. Rousseau’s literature, also emerges in J. Rancière’s thought. for Rancière, “Politics” unlike its natural evident and necessity in ancient political philosophy, is a "possible" matter ,and it is equivalent with democracy that finds ability to being through evidence of demos. In this review, realization of politics/democracy is relevant to pass through police as a concern of ancient political philosophy. In this essay, this question is considered that "how to be handled the logic of Supplementary in Derrida’s and Rancière’s works, and what points are common or different?". As the result of discussion, we have been able to say that "for both thinkers, the supplementary makes possibility for review of special aspects of political philosophy. At the same time, while for Derrida, it explains writing's inferiority in the beginning and then it will be represented meaningless through the operations of difference and play, for Rancière, as a void, it has creative disposition, In other words, it is a historical condition for stablishment of politics/democracy.