This thesis is basically an attempt to discuss the intrinsic intersubjective nature of the so-called ideal sciences, i.e. geometry or arithmetic. Based upon a thorough analysis of Husserls The Origin of Geometry and Derridas Edmund Husserl's Origin of Geometry: an Introduction this thesis takes geometry as an example of an ideal science. The main question of the thesis is how an ideal science or object is constituted. The thesis consist of two main chapters - “Geometry and Historicity” and “Language”- and a concluding discussion. "Geometry and Historicity” reflects upon the relationship between the ideal sciences, using geometry as an example, and historicity, time and traditionality." The “Language” chapter discusses the need for language to make communication within an intersubjective space possible", and further which implications writing has upon the formations of ideal structures. To conclude the thesis demonstrates how geometry is far from a 'neutral' science but is constituted and idealized within the intersubjective space. The thesis argues that geometry has been “traditionalized” as an authentic and, as it is conceived, true form of knowledge through a historical process of human relations. This is made possible with the intrinsic “objectifying” ability within language and more specifically the human literacy, which is essential for this “idealization” process. As a consequence our understanding of science needs further reflections on how language, historicity and ultimately human relations have played an essential part in its formation.

The following thesis represents an attempt to account for the novelist Don DeLillo's last three novels (Underworld (1999), The Body Artist (2001), and Cosmopolis (2003)) through the examination of what I conceive as DeLillo's philosophy of language. It is my assertion that the crucial and articulating aspect of DeLillo's philosophy of language is his investment in, and investigation of, irony. As I argue, DeLillo's novels presume a certain conjugation of what I refer to as the work of irony (the seemingly impossible work of tendering both the allegorical imperative of naming and the ironic imperative of Otherness) with the work of art. In other words, DeLillo's theory of language reveals his theory of art and, thus, his own theory of writing. This aesthetic philosophy becomes the critical tool with which DeLillo evaluates the various symbolic economies of a culture and its individuals caught within late capitalism. The impossibility of defining irony becomes, for DeLillo, a metaphor by which to understand language itself as what I refer to as a fallen and tender economy, constituted by an Otherness, which language can only tender. In his novels, DeLillo, I argue, suggests that language and subjectivity ought to be conceived of as forms of a faith in an Otherness, impossible to represent as such, to which all speech, violence, art, commodity and reproduction are indebted, and which we may mourn and represent - as we must - more or less faithfully, more or less blindly, and, by virtue of irony, more or less tenderly. The possibilities of faith and the ethical in art and representation, thus, for DeLillo, arise through an attention to an Otherness that can only be tendered through the very tenderness (fallenness, profanity, weakness) of allegory and language. To understand this is to understand the role of irony in DeLillo's philosophy, and also to understand DeLillo's profound commitment to language, his renovation of allegory through its mortification by irony and, thus, its remembering and mourning of Otherness. In this regard, DeLillo shares much with the melancholia of deconstruction as evinced within the language philosophies of Jacques Derrida and Paul de Man, in particular, Derrida's economic consideration, differance, and his notion of the work of mourning, both of which, I argue, offer the reader of DeLillo's texts ways of tendering the work of irony.

This essay attempts to listen to meaning in the borderland, and asks in between which faculties and senses, through which we see and/or listen to the world, do we seek sense? My writing is located on this border, or more precisely on the erased border that I call an interspace or an interval, the place where we look for sense in the relation between language, philosophy, politics, and music. I have done this through the reading of three contemporary philosophers: Jacques Derrida, Jean-Luc Nancy, and Angela Davis. Derrida and Nancy have provided me with a theoretical and philosophical background for my approach to Davis’s philosophic and political claims. My analysis sets out from Derrida’s différance and what it reveals in the sign system of language. This is continued through a discussion of Nancy’s question: Is philosophy capable of listening, in all senses of the word? Is the philosopher not someone who always hears? In my reading, this connection is established through the blue notes. Davis, finally, provides me with a support for my claim that we, in the political significance of blues, in the traces of meaning that it contains, might be able to listen to Derrida’s différance. Keywords: Listening, meaning, différance, blues, sonority, blue notes, in between, border, subject, Jacques Derrida, Angela Y Davis, Jean-Luc Nancy. / Denna uppsats syftar till att försöka lyssna till meningen i gränslandet – mellan vilka relationer i våra förmågor och sinnen, av att se och/eller lyssna till världen, söker vi mening? Jag vill skriva om den gränsen, eller mer kanske den utsuddade gränsen i platsen jag kallar mellansfär och mellanrum, som den plats där vi söker mening i relationen mellan språk, filosofi, politik och musik. När vi idag söker mening och talar om varat, om individen och subjektivitet, kan det vara så att vi inte längre kan göra det genom fasta tecken, system och former? Istället för att stanna kvar i ett tillstånd av upprepande och separerande som landar i uteslutande och förtryck, i värdeskalor och normer, istället för att endast höra klassiska notsystem, eller förstå språkliga regler hos fasta teckensystem; kan det vara så att vi idag får vända oss till lyssnandet och mellansfären i de blå tonernas différance för att förstå olika individer och subjektivitet i relation till världen? Genom att göra en analys av Derridas term différance i hans text med samma namn: ”Différance” ur boken Margins of philosophy, ska jag försöka närma mig Nancys bok Listening samt läsa hans text genom tanken på différance i Nancys teori och förståelse om lyssnandet.  För att undersöka hur lyssnande och musik kan få ett praktiskt uttryck, av de teoretiska meningarna vi söker i différance, vill jag använda musikgenrerna blues och jazz och de blå toner som bluesen förhåller sig i och mellan. Min teori är att bluesen kan ge en plats (av flera) för var skillnader möts mellan text, värld och musik; platsen där différance kan lyssnas till, synliggöras och hörs. I den teorin vänder jag mig till Angela Davis bok Blues Legacies and Black Feminism som stöd för bluesens utveckling. Det jag ämnar närma mig hos Davis är just bluesens meningssökande och plats i samhället