Abstract
Mark Dooley has recently argued (principally against Simon Critchley) that the attempt to establish too strong a connection between Jacques Derrida and Emmanuel Levinas not only distorts crucial disparities between their respective philosophies, it also contaminates Derridas recent work with Levinass inherent political naivety. In short, on Dooleys reading, Levinas is only of inspirational value for Derrida. I am not concerned with defending Critchleys own reading of the DerridaLevinas connection. My objective is rather to demonstrate, first, the way in which Dooleys argument hinges upon a misreading of Levinas and Derrida, and, second, why Derridas recent thinking is in fact fundamentally Levinasian. Key Words: contingency guilt Holocaust hospitality institutions nature suffering third party violence.