首页> 外文OA文献 >Disputes in the 'metaphysics' of ethico-political transformation : a re-assessment of the speculative philosophies of Jacques Derrida and Emmanuel Levinas
【2h】

Disputes in the 'metaphysics' of ethico-political transformation : a re-assessment of the speculative philosophies of Jacques Derrida and Emmanuel Levinas

机译:伦理 - 政治转型的“形而上学”之争:重新评估雅克·德里达和埃马纽埃尔·列维纳斯的思辨哲学

摘要

My thesis contests a putative congruity between Derrida and Levinas concerning discussions of responsibility, ethics and otherness. It attends to the fundamental 'metaphysical' differences between the two with respect to ontology, language and historicity. Consequently, it foregrounds two distinct conceptions of philosophy, which differ with respect to task, strategy and presentational form. Since Levinas's key notion of the 'face' [le visage], which cannot be equated to any actual countenance, breaks with phenomenality - no small issue for an avowed phenomenology - this thesis will begin by treating the category of the other (or. Other) in Levinas's writings as a conundrum. By analysing the two major topographies of the Other developed by Levinas in Totality and Infinity and Otherwise than Being (with particular attention to their differences), I ask: who or what counts as the other for Levinas? Concurrently, I track Derrida's writings across his career to see if he can be held to subscribe to either of these models, noting the transformations that Derrida effects upon Levinas. By analysing them in tandem, the metaphysical and speculative contours of both thinkers (which if not neglected in the secondary literature are transformed into quasi-theological positions) come to the fore. Thereby, this thesis seeks to revive questions of speculative thought in contemporary philosophy, whilst simultaneously asking how this speculative dimension preserves its status as philosophy despite its break with norms of written form and argumentation. Crucially, this is the terrain on which Derrida, in 'Violence and Metaphysics', had first criticised Levinas - his lack of attention to language and presentation meant his writing remained non-philosophical. '... exteriority and alterity are concepts which themselves have never surprised philosophical discourse. Philosophy by itself has always been concerned with them. These are not conceptual headings under which philosophy's border can be overflowed: the overflow is its object. Instead of determining some other circumscription, recognizing it, practicing it, bringing it to light, forming it, in a word producing it (and today this word serves as the crudest "new clothes" of the metaphysical denigration which accommodates itself very well to all these projects), in question will be, but according to a movement unheard of by philosophy, an other which is no longer its other. ' Jacques Derrida 'Tympan' [1972] translated by Alan Bass in Margins of Philosophy (Brighton, Harvester Press, 1982), pp. ix-xxix; pp. xiii-xiv. 'As has often been remarked, one of the gravest misfortunes that can affect a writer of great intellectual seriousness and strong ethical passions is to have his ideas "naturalized" by the English. ' Allan Janik and Stephen Toulmin Wittgenstein's Vienna (New York, Simon ;Schuster, 1973), p. 19.
机译:我的论文对德里达和列维纳斯之间关于责任,道德和其他性的讨论的假定一致提出了质疑。它关注了两者在本体,语言和历史性方面的根本“形而上学”差异。因此,它提出了两种截然不同的哲学概念,它们在任务,策略和表现形式方面有所不同。由于列维纳斯的“面子” [面容]的关键概念(不能等同于任何实际容貌)随着现象的发生而破裂(对于一个已宣称的现象学来说这不是一个小问题)-本论文将从处理另一个(或其他)的类别开始。 )在列维纳斯的著作中是一个难题。通过分析列维纳斯在《全面性和无限性》和《存在之外的其他方面》(特别注意它们之间的差异)开发的“他者”的两个主要地形,我问:对于列维纳斯来说,谁或谁可以算作另一个?同时,我追踪了德里达在他整个职业生涯中的著作,以了解他是否可以接受这两种模式中的任何一种,并注意到德里达对列维纳斯的影响。通过一前一后地分析它们,两位思想家的形而上学和推测性的轮廓(如果在二级文献中没有被忽略,则被转变为准神学的位置)。因此,本论文力图重新思考当代哲学中的思辨思想的问题,同时询问这种思辨性维度如何打破其书面形式和论证规范而保持其作为哲学的地位。至关重要的是,这是德里达在《暴力与形而上学》中首先批评列维纳斯的领域-他对语言和表现形式的缺乏关注意味着他的著作仍然是非哲学的。 '...外在性和变化性本身就是从未使哲学话语感到惊讶的概念。哲学本身一直与它们有关。这些不是可以超越哲学边界的概念性标题:溢出是其目标。与其说确定其他限制,不如认识,实践,揭示它,形成它,用一个词来产生(今天,这个词是形而上的贬义的最粗略的“新衣服”,它很好地适应了所有人这些项目),但是根据哲学界未曾听说过的运动,另一个已不再是另一个。雅克·德里达的《提姆潘》(Jacques Derrida'Tympan)[1972年],艾伦·巴斯(Alan Bass)在《哲学的边缘》(布赖顿,收割者出版社,1982年),第ix-xxix页中进行了翻译;第十三至十四页“正如经常提到的那样,可能会影响到一位具有极大的学术严肃性和强烈的道德激情的作家的最不幸的不幸之一,就是使他的思想被英语“自然化”。艾伦·贾尼克(Allan Janik)和史蒂芬·图尔敏·维特根斯坦(Stephen Toulmin Wittgenstein)的维也纳(纽约,西蒙;舒斯特,1973年),第1页。 19

著录项

  • 作者

    McGettigan Andrew;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2006
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 English
  • 中图分类
  • 入库时间 2022-08-20 21:06:22

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献

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