Between Levinas and Heidegger

John E. Drabinski is Professor of Black Studies at Amherst College. He is the author of several books, including Sensibility and Singularity: The Problem of Phenomenology in Levinas, also published by SUNY Press. Eric S. Nelson is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Massachusetts Lowell and the coeditor (with François Raffoul) of Rethinking Facticity, also published by SUNY Press.

出版者:SUNY Press

作者:John E. Drabinski - Editor

页数:276

出版时间:2014-8

价格:0

装帧:Hardcover

isbn号码:9781438452579

图书标签:海德格尔列维纳斯

Summary Read First Chapter image missing

Investigates the philosophical relationship between Levinas and Heidegger in a nonpolemical context, engaging some of philosophy’s most pressing issues.

Although both Levinas and Heidegger drew inspiration from Edmund Husserl’s phenomenological method and helped pave the way toward the post-structuralist movement of the late twentieth century, very little scholarly attention has been paid to the relation of these two thinkers. There are plenty of simple—and accurate—oppositions and juxtapositions: French and German, ethics and ontology, and so on. But there is also a critical intersection between Levinas and Heidegger on some of the most fundamental philosophical questions: What does it mean to be, to think, and to act in late modern life and culture? How do our conceptions of subjectivity, time, and history both reflect the condition of this historical moment and open up possibilities for critique, resistance, and transformation? The contributors to this volume take up these questions by engaging the ideas of Levinas and Heidegger relating to issues of power, violence, secularization, history, language, time, death, sacrifice, responsibility, memory, and the boundary between the human and humanism.

“The political background to the debate between Martin Heidegger and Emmanuel Levinas has often distorted the philosophical dispute … Fortunately, this volume approaches the debate with a clear view of the philosophical issue. It avoids polemically misconstruing Heidegger’s thought without making light of Levinas’s modification of it.” — Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews

Index