The main works of Levinas
Being as abuse
At the center of the philosophy of Levinas's assertion that ' be designed by tradition Western ontology, the being that is whole and fills every possible space for it remains eternally unchanging and stationary (being Parmenides, for instance) is prevarication on the differences. This being that fills all space, beyond which it seems possible to go, was the basis of the denial of the Other, the denial of any possibility other than itself. But it is precisely in the denial of any possible difference and otherness, Levinas says, that there lies the origin of the sense of evil in the abuse of power, selfishness and violence.
So the roots of violence and evil in men comes from the thought of the immutability of being for Levinas, a feature that prevents otherness known within his nature. In this sense of being there is enclosed to prevent the injustice of the immutable differences to show themselves for what they are.
Being as defined by greek-Parmenidean is a neutral concept, generally, to-person. In this sense of being there is contained the claim to be able to define and collect under one kind the whole range of differences that occur, subjecting them to a single rational law. But being who really has a meaning that is not to be general and personal-but be real man and things (in common with Heidegger's thought). Here, then, that the being of things is not a general category and all encompassing but is the existence of different beings, isolated from each other. The distinguishing characteristic of beings is their difference and their distinction from each other.
The true meaning of being is time for Levinas, the irreducible difference that exists between the different beings in the world. Being as it combines all the diversity in its essence is only meaningless, in reality there is a multiplicity of "being there" (in Heidegger), of men and things that exist individually and separately. Levinas says: "One of things you can share everything except exist." The existence of men and things is separate from the relationships that exist between the different beings isolated from each other born of life experience.
The ethics of the Other Self
From this preamble ontological Levinas derives the foundations of a new ethics. If the main feature being the philosophical tradition is to deny the otherness (denying the irreducible difference between the company and other entity), then the human ethics can now finally move by contacting the horizons renewed respect for otherness of each existent and not to conform to a single and unchanging foundation (Levinas calls this attitude of being obsessed).
Becoming aware that other individuals are something totally different than to our being we can define the meaning of a new ethic: I can not assimilate the Other to me, the other (or the individual different and separate from me) is inaccessible to my feeling, because I do not feel alive and not the his life. The Other is always so distinct from my being, remains something mysterious and inaccessible, which is revealed only through interpersonal communication.
In daily life, the man thinks under the categories of being inclusive, think as if she understood what he really lives the Other, but this is not possible. The true essence of man is that of isolation from other beings.
Levinas says that the ethics of the Other, therefore, moves from self-awareness that every individual must respect the difference of the other, except that it is unfathomable mystery, since we know nothing of others. What we think we know the other is only our image of others, in fact the others are inaccessible to our true knowledge.
Nothing can bring my self to truly embrace the other being, even the love understood as a desire to merge with each other. In reality, man can only move towards each other, recognizing the infinite difference which exists between being and being.
So think of an essence that unites all people hide the roots of violence: in this sense of things the man really believes he can possess some of the other as there is something essential in common. In fact, Levinas explains, there is no essence that can unite the individual existents isolated from each other, so the ethics which should guide relations between men is necessarily based on the recognition of this immeasurable difference between local and on the responsibility that every man contracted to the inaccessible mystery of the Other (the mystery made by other individuals, inaccessible to our true knowledge).
The desire for the infinite
In this philosophical view where there is the figure of the divine? Jew Levinas is a philosopher who studied and commented on the Talmud, placing itself in an almost theological perspective. Remains influenced by the cultural climate of the Jewish tradition, Levinas says that faith in God is never satisfied the desire for the infinite. The divine is not shown, it is silent even before the tragedy (Levinas lived the era of the Holocaust), but there is a trace of the divine in God's desire, the desire of the infinite, inaccessible to being more of absolutism individual man.
"No deals, no change of climate or background" - so he wrote the greatest of his works, Totality and Infinity - would be able to satisfy the "Desire". God is "totally gone, totally past, a past way immemorial, which "tracks", in which alone man can come across, are only those of a mysterious traveler who wanted to erase their tracks and that therefore "did not want to say and did not want to do anything with the tracks you leave ". (E. Severino, the wood and the ashes). (These issues will be important for the development of Derrida's thought, especially the concepts of différance and the trace of being).
Therefore God is the desire, while not showing the man he is the object of his desire. But this desire is not based on a vain desire to desire, desire is inspired by the desire, or the movement of the soul that leads man to the infinite desire more itself is caused by the presence of the divine to the fund, which is absolutely other than human beings. God exists, but does not show, and while not showing the desire to raise the self in men (faith).
Only by implementing this movement of the soul, desiring only the infinite something else, man can break the chain of being as a whole. Within this sense prevaricating man is forced to return by being, not to recognize the diversity and the irreducible difference. But when the man finally understands the truth of the ontological difference of each body part (and the supreme truth that is celebrated in the diversity of absolutely divine to man), man is able to stand on their way to the infinite, in a motion that never runs out towards the infinitely distant, but infinitely desired presence of God
soon Luciana
0 comments:
Post a Comment