首页> 外文学位 >Reconfiguring ontology: Transcendence, subjectivity, and being in Levinas's early philosophy.
【24h】

Reconfiguring ontology: Transcendence, subjectivity, and being in Levinas's early philosophy.

机译:重新配置本体:超越性,主观性以及列维纳斯的早期哲学。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This dissertation presents Levinas's philosophy in the period 1929-1940 as a distinct ontology, in contrast to the tendency to read his earliest work through the lens of his later ethical philosophy. Although Levinas's thought in this period is marked by a 1933 rupture with Heidegger, the critical movement of his philosophy remains ontological, reconfiguring the meaning and structures of being. In Levinas's early studies of Husserl and Heidegger (1929-1932), his original thought develops through the characteristic themes of subjectivity and transcendence, understood not ethically, but as a theory of being. It is through the problematic of the subject's transcendence that we can understand Levinas's early enthusiasm for Heidegger's ontology, how his interpretation of Husserl's phenomenology is parasitic on that ontology, and how Heidegger constitutes for Levinas a response to the shortcomings (idealism and intellectualism) of Husserl's thought.;The context of Levinas's early reception of Heidegger was a polarized worldview which pitted ontological against idealist philosophy, along with associated cultural and political forces, as evinced by events and writings in the period 1929-1933. Consequently, Levinas's 1934 writings not only display the rupture occasioned by Heidegger's involvement in National Socialism---recognizing the collapse of transcendence and freedom in his philosophy---but also inherit a theory of being read in terms of biological life. Being is described as the tragic enchainment of corporeal existence, against which the efforts of idealism to sustain a meaningful freedom and subjectivity remain intellectually necessary but existentially doomed. In 1935, Levinas continues this meditation, postulating an escape from being that inverts Heideggerian transcendence yet, far from anticipating a new transcendence beyond being, is ontologically identical with the impossibility of fleeing being. Being itself is indivisibly enchainment and escape.;Levinas opposes Heidegger with his own "counter-ontology," understanding the subject, being, and eventually transcendence through existential structures analogous to Heidegger's. These structures are retained through 1940, but their meaning and unity reconfigured. Being is understood as etre rive---being riveted---the modes of which include the aforementioned enchainment and escape, as well as a conception of the facticity of identity derived from Levinas's writings on Judaism in the later 1930s.
机译:这篇论文将列维纳斯在1929-1940年期间的哲学作为一种独特的本体论来呈现,这与人们倾向于通过其后来的伦理哲学的镜头来阅读其最早的著作形成了鲜明的对比。尽管在这一时期列维纳斯的思想以海德格尔1933年的破裂为标志,但他的哲学的批判运动仍然是本体论的,重新构造了存在的意义和结构。在列维纳斯对胡塞尔和海德格尔(1929-1932)的早期研究中,他的原始思想是通过主观性和超越性的特征主题发展的,这不是道德上的理解,而是作为一种存在的理论。通过对主体超越性的质疑,我们可以了解列维纳斯对海德格尔本体论的早期热情,他对胡塞尔现象学的解释是如何寄生于该本体论上的,以及海德格尔如何为列维纳斯构成了对列维纳斯对胡塞尔的缺点(理想主义和知识论)的回应列维纳斯对海德格尔的早期接受的背景是两极分化的世界观,该论点使本体论与唯心主义哲学以及相关的文化和政治力量相对立,正如在1929-1933年间的事件和著作所证明的那样。因此,列维纳斯(Levinas)在1934年的著作不仅显示了海德格尔(Heidegger)参与国家社会主义所引起的破裂-承认其哲学中的超越和自由崩溃-而且还继承了从生物生命角度进行阅读的理论。存在被描述为有形生存的悲剧性联结,理想主义者为维持有意义的自由和主观性所作的努力在思想上仍然是必要的,但在本质上注定了失败。 1935年,列维纳斯继续进行冥想,假设逃脱了存在,从而使海德格尔的超越发生了逆转,但从本体上讲,逃避存在是不可能的,从远未预见到超越存在的新超越。存在本身是不可分割的束缚和逃避。;列维纳斯以自己的“反本体论”反对海德格尔,他理解主题,存在,并最终通过类似于海德格尔的存在结构而超越。这些结构保留到1940年,但它们的意义和统一性得以重新配置。存在被理解为“被吸引”-被吸引-其模式包括上述的束缚和逃逸,以及从列维纳斯在1930年代后期关于犹太教的著作中得出的身份的事实性的概念。

著录项

  • 作者

    Sims, Jesse.;

  • 作者单位

    New School University.;

  • 授予单位 New School University.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2009
  • 页码 625 p.
  • 总页数 625
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 哲学理论;
  • 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