EMMANUELLEVINAS(1905-1995)
� BorninKaunas,Lithuania� LivedduringtheHolocaustwithhisJewishfamily� BeganstudiesatUniversityofStrassbourgin
philosophy� LevinassawacontrastbetweenWestern
philosophyandhisstrongJewishfaith(westernershadahabitofcategorizing
peoplebytryingtoestablishwhatwasthesamebetweenthem.)
LevinasandWorldWarII
� WWII–LevinaswascaughtbytheGermansandwasaprisonerofwarfor5years.
� HiswholefamilydiedintheHolocaustexceptfoehiswifeanddaughterwhoescapedandhidinamonasteryinFrancebutlostcommunicationwithhim.
� HiswarexperiencemadeLevinasmoreawareof“theOther”
ConnectingwithhisJewishRoots
� MordachiChouchani(Jewishteacher)wasLevinas’teacheratageof40
� HeinstructedLevinasintheJewishTalmud� Soon,LevinasalsoinstructedtheTalmudto
youngJewishintellectualsinFrance
TeachingandLastYears
� 1973–BecameprofessorofphilosophyatSorbonne(mostprestigiousschoolinParis)afterwritinghisfamousbook“TotalityandInfinity”
� Becameapopularwriterandsoonretired� Eveninlecturing,tookhisJewishvaluesvery
seriously(NolecturingontheSabbath)� Inhisownwritings,PopeJohnPaulIIusedLevinas’sideasanddiscussedwithhimoften.
WisdomofLoveLévinaspreferstothinkofphilosophyasthe"wisdomoflove“ratherthantheloveofwisdom(theliteralGreekmeaningoftheword"philosophy").Inhisview,responsibilityto“theOther”precedesany"objectivesearchingaftertruth".ForLevinas,ethicsis,firstandforemost,bornontheconcretelevelofpersontopersoncontact.
Hedoesnotfindmorality� inscribedwithinthewillofGod(Aquinas),� inreason(Kant),or� inanyuniversaldesireforpleasure(Bentham,Mill).
“TheOther”Levinasisnotconcernedwiththepropositionoflawsormoralrules.ThedrivingforcebehindLevinas’strainofthoughtisnottodiscoverthetruthofethics,buttomakeanappealforethicaltransformation.Levinasinvitesustolisten,notonlytowhathehastosay,but,moreimportantly,tothevoiceof‘theOther’,whosanctionsallofourmoralobligation.Whendefiningethics,Levinaswouldarguethattherecanbenoethicswithoutatleasttwopeople.Itistosaythatethicsisanimportantissueforusbecauseitgovernsthewayinwhichwerelatewithoneanother.
ThisdefinitionaccordingtoLevinasisnotunfounded:� St.Thomastellsusthat"harmshouldnotbegiventoanother".� Kant'sCategoricalImperativeindicatesthatthemoralagentshould"treat
humanity,whetherinhis/herownpersonorthepersonofanother,notonlyasameansbutalsoasanendinitself."
� Mill's"principleofutility"impliesotherswhenhenotesthatethicsisrootedinthenotionofthegreatesthappinessforthegreatestnumber.
� Ifethicsisconcernedwiththeother,thenitwouldappearthatinordertofilloutacompleteaccountofethics,themeansbywhichtwopeoplecomeincontactwitheachotherwillbevitallyimportant.Here,thenistherootofLevinas'concern:toestablishthesourceofcontactbetweenpersonsorthesourceofinterpersonalmeaning,andinfindingthismeaning,Levinasfindstheethical.
Whatis“TheOther”?Toanon-philosopher,thesourceofcontactbetweenpersonsseemstobeasuperficialquestion.Theansweris,atfirst,easy.Theotherpersonismetinexperienceeveryday,onthestreet,intheclassroom,intheworkplace,etc.Toaphilosopher,however,thequestionisnotsoeasybecausetheybecomeburdenedbyexistentialthoughts.
� Doestheotherpersonhaveamind?� Istheotheracreationofmyimagination?ThefamousphilosopherDescarteswasparticularlypreoccupiedbythesequestions.Hestated,“If‘theOther’ismerelyanidea,oraworkofmymind,thenhowcanIknowwhatisrealindependentofmyperceptionofitsinceideasarecreatedandinventedbyamind,notdiscovered?”
Giventhisviewtowardsideas,then,anytimeIperceiveorpresupposemyideaofwhatorwhoapersonshouldbe,Ihaveclosedoffcontactwiththerealperson;Ihavecutofftheconnectionwiththeotherthatisnecessaryifethicsistorefertorealotherpeople.Thisisacentralviolencetotheotherthatdeniestheotherhis/herownautonomy.Levinascallsthisviolence"totalization"anditoccurswheneverIlimit‘theOther’toasetofrationalcategories,betheyracial,sexual,orotherwise.Indeed,itoccurswheneverIalreadyknowwhattheotherisaboutbeforetheotherhasspoken.Totalizationisadenialoftheother'sdifference,andaccordingtoLevinasthisisunethical.AccordingtoLevinas,‘theOther’existsindependentlyofme.‘TheOther’cannotbeaninterpretationoraworkingofmyownmind.Onecannotreduce‘theOther’tohis/herdiscretesetofideas.Thiscutsoffcontactwith‘theother.’
Transcendence� Levinas'work,TotalityandInfinity(1969),isacritiqueof
Westernphilosophy.LevinaswasconcernedwithWesternphilosophy’spreoccupationwith‘Being,’attheexpenseof‘theOther.’LevinasperceivedtheWesternphilosophicaltraditionasattemptingtoovercomealldifferenceanddiversitybygroupingeverythingunderanall-encompassingunitywhichitcalled‘Being.’Beingseekstonamewhatthingshaveincommonwhenyoutakeawayallthedifferences.AccordingtoLevinas,westernerswereguiltyofthinkingawaydifference.Differenceisreducedtobeingaccidental(meaningnon-essentialbecauseitchangesineveryindividual).Thisconceptofbeingisdangerousbecauseittakesawayfromrealitywhatisitsmostfascinatingquality:thateachpersoninincrediblyunique.
Infinity� LikeAristotle’sandKant’s
ethics,Levinasisinsearchofthegood.WhereasWesternphilosophypreoccupiesitselfwiththesearchforBeing,LevinaswentinsearchofthegoodwhichhesaidgoesbeyondBeing.TheGoodisinterestednotinwhatiscommonamongthings,butinwhatisabsolutelyuniqueabouteachpersonorthing.Levinascallstheseuniquethingsandpersons‘traces’oftheGoodorGod.NotangibleobjectiseveridenticaltoGod,orthegood.
AccordingtoLevinashowdoweachievethegood?
� Inordertoachievethegood,Levinasarguesthatwemustorientourselvestoward‘theOther.’ForLevinas,theoptimalfacetofaceencounterrequiresaspecificorientation.When‘theOther’entersourself-focussedworld,‘theOther’placeshim/herselfaboveus.Notinasuperiorordominatingsense,butinawaythatyoulosethepowerofyourownproudsubjectivityandbecomeinsteadtheonewhoiscalledtorespond.Youarenowplacedintheroleofservantratherthanmaster.Youareplacedinareceptiveandresponsivepositionwhichdemandsyouraction.‘TheOther’thatimposesitselfdoesnotlimitbutpromotesmyfreedom,byarousingmygoodness.‘TheOther’impactsyouunlikeanyworldlyobjectorforce.
� Thinkofatimeyouhadanabsoluteexperienceofanother:afacetofaceexperiencethattouchedyoudeeply.Intheeyesoftheotheryoumeetastranger,onewhomyoucannotreducetobeingyou.Andinthisperson’slook,‘theOther’callsyounottoreducehis/herfacetobeingthesameasanyotherface.Thisperson’sfaceisa“no”:arefusaltoletyoureducethefaceortodenythefaceitsuniqueness.Whenonerealizesthat‘theOther’s’faceescapesobjectification,thisiswhenLevinassaysthatweexperienceanepiphany.Thisepiphanyrevealsourresponsibilityfor‘theOther.’Weare,asLevinasstates,"hostage"totheotherthroughourresponsibility.Ourresponsibilityfortheotherisnonreciprocal–weexpectnothinginreturn.Wealways,asLevinasinsists,havearesponsibilitytoattendtoaswearesubjecttothefaceandcallof‘theOther.’
� Herethesearchforthegoodends.Levinas’sethicsdoesnotbendusinGod’sdirection,butittwistsusinthedirectionofourneighbour.God’sinfinitegoodnesstouchesuswithoutourknowledge.God’stouchwillalwaysbeindirect.Godtouchesusthroughthefaceof‘theOther’whobegssparechangefromus.Godrefusestoappear,leavingonlyatraceinthefaceof‘theOther,’retreatingtomakeroomfor‘theOther.’