Response to Ochs

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

If Peter Ochs' objections to what Levinas calls "the logic of the same" are to categorizations (binarism) or generalizations (over-generalizations) that do not fit the cases to which they are applied, then he is arguing against a straw man. If, alternatively, he is objecting to binarism or to generalization even when either does fit the cases to which it is applied, he needs to explain why. The quest for unifying principles is laudable, not lamentable. The way to detect categorizations and generalizations that do not fit is by trying to make them fit. Not soul searching but testing is the proper means. And testing is continually conducted by theorists and followers themselves, if also by rivals. One need not depend on critics of binarism or generalizations for tough-mindedness.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)495-498
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Religion
Volume74
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Response to Ochs'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this