Apologies: Levinas and Dialogue

Robert Christopher Plant

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In his recent article 'Speech and Sensibility: Levinas and Habermas on the Constitution of the Moral Point of View', Steven Hendley argues that Levinas's preoccupation with language as 'exposure' to the 'other' provides an important corrective to Habermas's focus on the 'procedural' aspects of communication. Specifically, what concerns Hendley is the question of moral motivation, and how Levinas, unlike Habermas, responds to this question by stressing the dialogical relation as one of coming 'into proximity to the face of the other' who possesses 'the authority to command my consideration'. Hendley's thesis is bold and provocative. However, it relies on too partial a reading of Levinas's work. In this paper I argue that the sense in which Levinas thinks of 'justifying oneself' cannot be adequately understood in terms of an,outstretched field of questions and answers'. Rather, Levinas's primary concern is to show how, prior to dialogue, the 'I' is constituted in existential guilt: the violence of simply being-there.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)79-94
Number of pages16
JournalInternational Journal of Philosophical Studies
Volume14
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2006

Keywords

  • Levinas
  • Habermas
  • dialogue
  • discourse ethics
  • suffering
  • apology
  • ethics

Cite this

Apologies : Levinas and Dialogue. / Plant, Robert Christopher.

In: International Journal of Philosophical Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, 03.2006, p. 79-94.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Plant, Robert Christopher. / Apologies : Levinas and Dialogue. In: International Journal of Philosophical Studies. 2006 ; Vol. 14, No. 1. pp. 79-94.
@article{20dd95119bc84e36a208d1645a9d3d39,
title = "Apologies: Levinas and Dialogue",
abstract = "In his recent article 'Speech and Sensibility: Levinas and Habermas on the Constitution of the Moral Point of View', Steven Hendley argues that Levinas's preoccupation with language as 'exposure' to the 'other' provides an important corrective to Habermas's focus on the 'procedural' aspects of communication. Specifically, what concerns Hendley is the question of moral motivation, and how Levinas, unlike Habermas, responds to this question by stressing the dialogical relation as one of coming 'into proximity to the face of the other' who possesses 'the authority to command my consideration'. Hendley's thesis is bold and provocative. However, it relies on too partial a reading of Levinas's work. In this paper I argue that the sense in which Levinas thinks of 'justifying oneself' cannot be adequately understood in terms of an,outstretched field of questions and answers'. Rather, Levinas's primary concern is to show how, prior to dialogue, the 'I' is constituted in existential guilt: the violence of simply being-there.",
keywords = "Levinas, Habermas, dialogue, discourse ethics, suffering, apology, ethics",
author = "Plant, {Robert Christopher}",
year = "2006",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1080/09672550500445145",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "79--94",
journal = "International Journal of Philosophical Studies",
issn = "0967-2559",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Apologies

T2 - Levinas and Dialogue

AU - Plant, Robert Christopher

PY - 2006/3

Y1 - 2006/3

N2 - In his recent article 'Speech and Sensibility: Levinas and Habermas on the Constitution of the Moral Point of View', Steven Hendley argues that Levinas's preoccupation with language as 'exposure' to the 'other' provides an important corrective to Habermas's focus on the 'procedural' aspects of communication. Specifically, what concerns Hendley is the question of moral motivation, and how Levinas, unlike Habermas, responds to this question by stressing the dialogical relation as one of coming 'into proximity to the face of the other' who possesses 'the authority to command my consideration'. Hendley's thesis is bold and provocative. However, it relies on too partial a reading of Levinas's work. In this paper I argue that the sense in which Levinas thinks of 'justifying oneself' cannot be adequately understood in terms of an,outstretched field of questions and answers'. Rather, Levinas's primary concern is to show how, prior to dialogue, the 'I' is constituted in existential guilt: the violence of simply being-there.

AB - In his recent article 'Speech and Sensibility: Levinas and Habermas on the Constitution of the Moral Point of View', Steven Hendley argues that Levinas's preoccupation with language as 'exposure' to the 'other' provides an important corrective to Habermas's focus on the 'procedural' aspects of communication. Specifically, what concerns Hendley is the question of moral motivation, and how Levinas, unlike Habermas, responds to this question by stressing the dialogical relation as one of coming 'into proximity to the face of the other' who possesses 'the authority to command my consideration'. Hendley's thesis is bold and provocative. However, it relies on too partial a reading of Levinas's work. In this paper I argue that the sense in which Levinas thinks of 'justifying oneself' cannot be adequately understood in terms of an,outstretched field of questions and answers'. Rather, Levinas's primary concern is to show how, prior to dialogue, the 'I' is constituted in existential guilt: the violence of simply being-there.

KW - Levinas

KW - Habermas

KW - dialogue

KW - discourse ethics

KW - suffering

KW - apology

KW - ethics

U2 - 10.1080/09672550500445145

DO - 10.1080/09672550500445145

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 79

EP - 94

JO - International Journal of Philosophical Studies

JF - International Journal of Philosophical Studies

SN - 0967-2559

IS - 1

ER -