where does Derrida's differánce fit into the multiplicities of traces? well, that's it, isn't it? as the "open-ended and porous receptacle of the uncontainable...an un-principle," it doesn't stand to fit in anywhere. it is the "quasi-condition" of the place where multiplicities are forged and conceived, the BWO over which they glide and accumulate; conceived in bunches, in arbitrariness, born as multiplicities themselves but in absence of a single time or place of conception. differánce not as the "midwife" -- certainly not as the "mother" -- but as the incestuous "bastard" without a name or face.
how can multiplicities be handled as the "primary" basic units everyone's looking for (but via an ANTI-reductionism) -- such as is proposed by Zizek? is it a joke?
if multiplicites are to be infinitely, indefinitely, inscribed by différance, the problem is one of 'specific' multiplicites -- perhaps a sort of oxymoron -- which are immediately dissembled upon their address by attention and meaning, not unlike the killing of Schrödinger's cat. yet to speak of multiplicities in an empty fashion is also a waste of time, i would think, and probably also irresponsible. i'll need more theoretical context from Zizek.