首页> 外文学位 >Putting ethics first: Reconsidering Emmanuel Levinas's ethical metaphysics.
【24h】

Putting ethics first: Reconsidering Emmanuel Levinas's ethical metaphysics.

机译:将道德放在首位:重新考虑伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯的道德形而上学。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

My dissertation addresses a frequent criticism of Emmanuel Levinas. Levinas is best known for his powerful claims about the importance of ethics. Many critics fault him, though, because he never specifies any useful, action-guiding ethical principles. Many also charge that he cannot offer any such principles. Levinas thinks there is an aspect of our encounters with other persons, one involving the responsibilities we have to them, that cannot be fully comprehended, and he criticizes philosophers for not respecting this fact. Yet it would seem contradictory for him, in turn, to develop ethical rules or norms that purport to be expressive of this side of human life. My dissertation shows that this criticism is misplaced. I argue, first, that he draws his epistemic conclusions about the transcendence of what he calls "the human other" by reflecting on the fact that our ethical responsibilities to others override other relationships we have to them. Another person is always, first and foremost, a being to whom I have certain obligations; Levinas uses the rhetoric of transcendence and infinitude to emphasize the way in which acknowledging these responsibilities differs from other acts of cognition. Nothing in his argument, however, prevents him from specifying a normative ethics. I develop this argument in part through a close reading of pivotal sections of Totality and Infinity. I also test it by reviewing claims he makes about the inexplicability of the Holocaust. My dissertation's later chapters show that Levinas does, in fact, specify a normative ethics in his work. I review several places where he endorses liberal ethical ideals. I also clarify his brand of liberalism by faulting recent efforts to assimilate his ethics to some form of Kantian liberalism.
机译:我的论文主要是针对伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯的批评。列维纳斯以其对道德重要性的有力主张而闻名。但是,许多批评家都指责他,因为他从未具体说明任何有用的,可指导行动的道德原则。许多人还指责他不能提供任何此类原则。列维纳斯认为,我们与他人相遇的一个方面涉及我们对他人的责任,这一方面无法完全理解,他批评哲学家不尊重这一事实。然而,反过来,对于他而言,发展出旨在表达人类生活这一方面的道德规则或准则似乎是矛盾的。我的论文表明,这种批评是错误的。首先,我认为,他通过反思我们对他人的道德责任凌驾于我们与他人之间的其他关系这一事实,得出他对所谓“人类他人”的超越的认识论结论。首先,永远是另一个人,我负有一定的义务。列维纳斯用超越和无限的修辞来强调承认这些责任与其他认知行为不同的方式。但是,他的论点并没有阻止他规定规范的伦理。我通过仔细阅读《全面性》和《无限》的关键部分来发展这一论点。我还通过回顾他对大屠杀的莫名其妙的说法进行测试。论文的后续章节表明,列维纳斯的确在其工作中指明了规范伦理。我回顾了他认可自由主义道德理想的几个地方。我还通过责怪最近将他的伦理学同某种形式的康德自由主义同化的努力来阐明他的自由主义品牌。

著录项

  • 作者

    Shaw, Joshua.;

  • 作者单位

    Indiana University.;

  • 授予单位 Indiana University.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2004
  • 页码 223 p.
  • 总页数 223
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号