![]() Hackett) outlines the prima facia system of metaethical moral intuitionism advocated by W.D. This final essay of part one (#4, by the other editor, J. Scholars interested in the problem of the other will find this essay an invaluable exegesis, and an elegant proposed solution. The author states that the described transcendence, power, and even tyranny of the other can only be overcome by learning to ‘resist’ the other-to say ‘no’-without rejecting or succumbing to them. Instead, a Kierkegaardian leap of faith from phenomenology to Lacanian psychoanalytic theory, and the ‘ethics of resistance’, is made. The author argues that Levinas’s descriptive account should not be read as a solution to the problem (and that, in fact, to do so is to commit an ethical infraction). This essay gives an excellent genealogical trace of the ‘problem’, starting from Husserl and travelling via Heidegger to Levinas. Dalton’s essay (#3)-a highlight of this section-picks up on a theme from essay #2: the ‘problem of the other’ in Levinas’s philosophy. This essay is innovative and lofty, but, as would be expected, it’s a little short on detail, and thereby sometimes lacks epistemological weight.ĭ. Also, the intersubjective constitution of objectivity promotes an ethics based on mutual dialogue and interaction, and deconstructive phenomenology might help in breaking down pre-established categories-like ‘the poor’, and ‘developing countries’-which often don’t really carve concrete ethical reality at the joints. For example, Minister argues, there are advantages to taking on Levinas’s ethics of alterity and self-responsibility towards others as a summum bonum, because this overcomes the egocentric biases of utilitarian and deontological approaches, or those ethical theories based on either rationality or self-interest. Minister (essay #2) shows how phenomenological themes can be relevant to global ethics. The division of this review will follow the six parts of the book, and reference essay numbers. ![]() There was, also, generally a shared sensitivity in protecting the methods and contents of phenomenology from the aforementioned shallows. The exegesis of non-canonical figures and outsiders is a great way to approach the often well-worn phenomenological path. There is novel research, the utilisation of classical phenomenological themes, interspersed with original yet rigorous analysis and description. The variety of scholarship is remarkable. As a result, the chapters in this volume are easily digestible, but also educational, because of their accessible style (bar essay #5 and #10). The editors resisted giving the contributors lengthy word counts. Overall, I found the collection of 18 essays in this volume enlivening. It was, then, with keen sensibilities to the shallows that I set out. ![]() We are assured early that this volume hopes phenomenology can “find a way to be a mile wide, as it were, without only being an inch deep” (pg. ![]() I was concerned that, in its attempt to expand and chart new territory, phenomenology might contract incomprehensibility and irrationalism. Simmons) memorably asks “has phenomenology caught the sickness it is trying to cure?” (p. The introduction (essay #1, by one of the editors, J. My concerns were echoed in the introduction and preface where Gallagher asks how we can continue to recognise phenomenology as we push it into fresh areas. When I set out to review this work I was concerned that the essence of phenomenology, and in particular the aspirations of Husserl, might be lost during this book’s attempts at cross-pollination, hybridization and interbreeding (if they have not already). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |