EMMANUEL LEVINAS: ETHICS OF THE FACE (Relational Ethics)

EMMANUEL LEVINAS (1905-1995) Born in Kaunas, Lithuania Lived during the Holocaust with his Jewish family Began studies at University of Strassbourg in philosophy Levinas saw a contrast between Western philosophy and his strong Jewish faith (westerners had a habit of categorizing people by trying to establish what was the same between them.)

Levinas and World War II WWII – Levinas was caught by the Germans and was a prisoner of war for 5 years. His whole family died in the Holocaust except foe his wife and daughter who escaped and hid in a monastery in France but lost communication with him. His war experience made Levinas more aware of “the Other”

Connecting with his Jewish Roots Mordachi Chouchani (Jewish teacher) was Levinas’ teacher at age of 40 He instructed Levinas in the Jewish Talmud Soon, Levinas also instructed the Talmud to young Jewish intellectuals in France

Teaching and Last Years 1973 – Became professor of philosophy at Sorbonne (most prestigious school in Paris) after writing his famous book “Totality and Infinity” Became a popular writer and soon retired Even in lecturing, took his Jewish values very seriously (No lecturing on the Sabbath) In his own writings, Pope John Paul II used Levinas’s ideas and discussed with him often.

Wisdom of Love Lévinas prefers to think of philosophy as the "wisdom of love“ rather than the love of wisdom (the literal Greek meaning of the word "philosophy"). In his view, responsibility to “the Other” precedes any "objective searching after truth". For Levinas, ethics is, first and foremost, born on the concrete level of person to person contact. He does not find morality inscribed within the will of God (Aquinas), in reason (Kant), or in any universal desire for pleasure (Bentham, Mill).

“The Other” Levinas is not concerned with the proposition of laws or moral rules. The driving force behind Levinas’s train of thought is not to discover the truth of ethics, but to make an appeal for ethical transformation. Levinas invites us to listen, not only to what he has to say, but, more importantly, to the voice of ‘the Other’, who sanctions all of our moral obligation. When defining ethics, Levinas would argue that there can be no ethics without at least two people. It is to say that ethics is an important issue for us because it governs the way in which we relate with one another. This definition according to Levinas is not unfounded: St. Thomas tells us that "harm should not be given to another". Kant's Categorical Imperative indicates that the moral agent should "treat humanity, whether in his/her own person or the person of another, not only as a means but also as an end in itself." Mill's "principle of utility" implies others when he notes that ethics is rooted in the notion of the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

If ethics is concerned with the other, then it would appear that in order to fill out a complete account of ethics, the means by which two people come in contact with each other will be vitally important. Here, then is the root of Levinas' concern: to establish the source of contact between persons or the source of interpersonal meaning, and in finding this meaning, Levinas finds the ethical.

What is “The Other”? To a non-philosopher, the source of contact between persons seems to be a superficial question. The answer is, at first, easy. The other person is met in experience every day, on the street, in the classroom, in the workplace, etc. To a philosopher, however, the question is not so easy because they become burdened by existential thoughts. Does the other person have a mind? Is the other a creation of my imagination? The famous philosopher Descartes was particularly preoccupied by these questions. He stated, “If ‘the Other’ is merely an idea, or a work of my mind, then how can I know what is real independent of my perception of it since ideas are created and invented by a mind, not discovered?”

Given this view towards ideas, then, anytime I perceive or presuppose my idea of what or who a person should be, I have closed off contact with the real person; I have cut off the connection with the other that is necessary if ethics is to refer to real other people. This is a central violence to the other that denies the other his/her own autonomy. Levinas calls this violence "totalization" and it occurs whenever I limit ‘the Other’ to a set of rational categories, be they racial, sexual, or otherwise. Indeed, it occurs whenever I already know what the other is about before the other has spoken. Totalization is a denial of the other's difference, and according to Levinas this is unethical. According to Levinas, ‘the Other’ exists independently of me. ‘The Other’ cannot be an interpretation or a working of my own mind. One cannot reduce ‘the Other’ to his/her discrete set of ideas. This cuts off contact with ‘the other.’

Transcendence Levinas' work, Totality and Infinity (1969), is a critique of Western philosophy. Levinas was concerned with Western philosophy’s preoccupation with ‘Being,’ at the expense of ‘the Other.’ Levinas perceived the Western philosophical tradition as attempting to overcome all difference and diversity by grouping everything under an all-encompassing unity which it called ‘Being.’ Being seeks to name what things have in common when you take away all the differences. According to Levinas, westerners were guilty of thinking away difference. Difference is reduced to being accidental (meaning non-essential because it changes in every individual). This concept of being is dangerous because it takes away from reality what is its most fascinating quality: that each person in incredibly unique.

Infinity Like Aristotle’s and Kant’s ethics, Levinas is in search of the good. Whereas Western philosophy preoccupies itself with the search for Being, Levinas went in search of the good which he said goes beyond Being. The Good is interested not in what is common among things, but in what is absolutely unique about each person or thing. Levinas calls these unique things and persons ‘traces’ of the Good or God. No tangible object is ever identical to God, or the good.

According to Levinas how do we achieve the good? In order to achieve the good, Levinas argues that we must orient ourselves toward ‘the Other.’ For Levinas, the optimal face to face encounter requires a specific orientation. When ‘the Other’ enters our self-focussed world, ‘the Other’ places him/herself above us. Not in a superior or dominating sense, but in a way that you lose the power of your own proud subjectivity and become instead the one who is called to respond. You are now placed in the role of servant rather than master. You are placed in a receptive and responsive position which demands your action. ‘The Other’ that imposes itself does not limit but promotes my freedom, by arousing my goodness. ‘The Other’ impacts you unlike any worldly object or force.

Think of a time you had an absolute experience of another: a face to face experience that touched you deeply. In the eyes of the other you meet a stranger, one whom you cannot reduce to being you. And in this person’s look, ‘the Other’ calls you not to reduce his/her face to being the same as any other face. This person’s face is a “no”: a refusal to let you reduce the face or to deny the face its uniqueness. When one realizes that ‘the Other’s’ face escapes objectification, this is when Levinas says that we experience an epiphany. This epiphany reveals our responsibility for ‘the Other.’ We are, as Levinas states, "hostage" to the other through our responsibility. Our responsibility for the other is nonreciprocal – we expect nothing in return. We always, as Levinas insists, have a responsibility to attend to as we are subject to the face and call of ‘the Other.’

Here the search for the good ends Here the search for the good ends. Levinas’s ethics does not bend us in God’s direction, but it twists us in the direction of our neighbour. God’s infinite goodness touches us without our knowledge. God’s touch will always be indirect. God touches us through the face of ‘the Other’ who begs spare change from us. God refuses to appear, leaving only a trace in the face of ‘the Other,’ retreating to make room for ‘the Other.’

Summary of Theories Aristotle Kant Levinas Main Idea What is good? What motivates humans? Moral guidelines Life orientation Requirements Strengths Weakness

Ethical Theorists: A Comparison of Main Ideas Aristotle Kant Levinas Main idea Vision or purpose or ends Duties and structures Encounter with the other What is good? Human activity aims at achieving the good A human act is morally good when it is done for the sake of duty The central question is: where is the good? What motivates humans Humans find happiness within community I must act in such a way that the principles according to which I act should become universal law The face of the other calls me to respond Moral guidelines Values Rules Needs Life orientation Goals Duties Others Requirements Imagination Responsibility Involvement Strengths Vision, direction Structure, organization Heart, grounding Weaknesses Irrelevancy; ends justify the means Bureaucracy; blindly following orders Sentimentality; people wear masks

ETHICAL THEORISTS: A COMPARISON OF MAIN IDEAS Aristotle Kant Levinas Humans find happiness within community To be happy is to live well and do well Human activity aims at achieving the good—happiness The highest form of happiness is based on rational behaviour—live an ethical life Ethics is a matter of one’s inner conviction and autonomy A human act is morally good when it is done for the sake of duty The use of reason is central to moral life—duty is determined by principles The central question in philosophy is: where is the Good? Each thing or person is a unique expression of the Good The face of another calls me to respond

Aristotle Kant Levinas HOW??? Be moderate in all things Absolute good can be found only in God Good is inscribed by God into the nature of all things (innate) To find the good in anything is to discover its purpose A person develops good character by acting virtuously—virtues control passions I must act in such a way that the principles according to which I act should become a universal law The only good is good will Good is only good if it is done out of good will and provides no personal gain Moral acts are performed out of duty and obligation Reason dictates what is good Goodness translates into responsibility for the Other (turn away from own desires and interests) The infinite Good (God) is at the heart of ethics The good comes as a vocation (not from myself)