In Desmond Manderson (ed.), Essays on Levinas and Law: A Mosaic. Palgrave Macmillan (2008)
|Abstract||Levinas and Adorno both refuse to translate their stringent ethical convictions into a programmatic social theory because translating their theories of non-identity into models of governance would necessarily perpetrate, en masse, the very subsumptive violence they denounce. Although Levinas and Adorno have come to provide ethical guidance to Continental philosophers, their outright refusal to be drawn into applied theory has caused innumerable difficulties for progressive theorists compelled by their critiques of instrumental reason but handcuffed by their skepticism toward practical reform. I do not mean to suggest that Adorno and Levinas were not personally engaged with political causes or that numerous interpreters have not extrapolated political content from their work, but rather that Levinas and Adorno expressly blocked the conversion of ethics into political and legal programs on ethical grounds. This paper outlines the procedural and substantive questions that I find most worrisome for a "Jurisprudence of Alterity" motivated by Levinas or Adorno.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
J. M. Bernstein (2001). Adorno: Disenchantment and Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
Jack Reynolds (2002). Merleau-Ponty, Levinas, and the Alterity of the Other. Symposium 6 (1):63-78.
Oona Eisenstadt (2006). Levinas and Adorno: Universalizing the Jew After Auschwitz. Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 14 (1):131-151.
Carl Sachs (2011). The Acknowledgement of Transcendence: Anti-Theodicy in Adorno and Levinas. Philosophy and Social Criticism 37 (3):273-294.
Leah Kalmanson (2010). Levinas in Japan: The Ethics of Alterity and the Philosophy of No-Self. Continental Philosophy Review 43 (2):193-206.
Ming Lim (2007). The Ethics of Alterity and the Teaching of Otherness. Business Ethics 16 (3):251–263.
Asher Howoritz (2002). 'By a Hair's Breadth': Critique, Transcendence and the Ethical in Adorno and Levinas. Philosophy and Social Criticism 28 (2).
Georg W. Bertram (2006). Die Idee der Philosophie von Emmanuel Lévinas. Studia Phaenomenologica 6:241-260.
Nick Smith (2007). Adorno Vs. Levinas: Evaluating Points of Contention. Continental Philosophy Review 40 (3):275-306.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #232,628 of 549,198 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?