The Animal Response in Derrida's 'The Animal That I Therefore Am'

Among the many distinctions and boundaries between man and animal that Derrida examines and challenges in The Animal That Therefore I Am, the one to which he returns most frequently is the animal's inability to respond. His critique of the division between man and animal based on the capacity for response is situated within his broader critique of logocentrism. Within this critique, he focuses most intently on humans' interest not in the animal's lack of speech, but in the fact that it is private and deprives humans of a response. This paper examines how Derrida challenges the logocentric division between man and animal centered on the capacity for response, revealing an anthropo-logo-centric structure underlying this distinction, and explores how the vulnerable human questioner — not the animal — turns out to be the one most concerned with the capability of response.