Responsibility and Justice in Levinas

7/23/2019 Responsibility and Justice in Levinas

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/responsibility-and-justice-in-levinas 1/11

Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Revista Portuguesa de

Filosofia.

http://www.jstor.org

Revista Portuguesa de ilosofia

Emmanuel Levinas: Philosopher and JewAuthor(s): Richard A. CohenSource: Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia, T. 62, Fasc. 2/4, Entre Razão e Revelação: A'Lógica' daDimensão Semíta na Filosofia / Between Reason and Revelation: The 'Logic' of the SemiticDimension in Philosophy (Apr. - Dec., 2006), pp. 481-490

Published by: Revista Portuguesa de FilosofiaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40419475Accessed: 11-11-2015 22:30 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 130.104.1.130 on Wed, 11 Nov 2015 22:30:55 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rpf

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40419475

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp






http://www.jstor.org/stable/40419475

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rpf

http://www.jstor.org/



nCltir\

RPF'

V

Iv-jffl

62 2006

Emmanuel

Levinas:

Philosopher

nd

Jew

Richard

A. Cohen*

Abstract:

Levinas

seamlessly

nites

philosophy

nd

religion

ia

ethics.

By doing

o he

satisfies hilosophy'suestfor ustificationyfinding

t neither

n

epistemology

or

aesthetics

nor

in

an

escapist

"fundamentalism")

ut in

the

responsibility

f

each

person

for

each

other

nd

for

ll others.

That

is to

say,

the

"ground"

f meaning

emerges

neither

n

intellect

or

imagination

but

in the

moral

responsibilities

ne

person

has

for

nother

nd,

beyond

hese

lready

nfinite bligations,

n the

ustice

-

law

and

equality

that

uch

responsibilities

equire

nd

engender.

ll

of

this

s at

the

ame

time

consistent

xpression,

ndeed

profoundly

ature

xpression

f

the

ethical

monotheist

ision

of

traditional

abbinic

Judaism

nd

of non-mythological

religious

onsciousness

more

generally.

Key

Words:

Commandment;

thics;

Judaism;

Justice;

aw;

Levinas,

Emmanuel

(1906-1995);

Monotheism;

bedience;

eace;

Philosophy; eligion;

Responsi-

bility;

almud;

heology;

orah;Universalism.

Resumo:

O

pensamento

e

Emmanuel

Levinas

nduz

uma

unido

perfeita

ntre

ilosofia

e

Religido

mediante

Etica.

Nesta

medida,

filosofo

a

resposta

pergunta

a

Filo-

sofia

pela

sua

propria

ustificagdo,

ustificagdo

ssa

que

ele ndo

encontra

nem

na

epistemologia

em

na estetica

nem

em

qualquer

forma

de

escapismo

fundamenta-

lista),

mas

na

responsabilidade

e cada

pessoa

por

cada

um e

por

todos.

Ora

isto

equivale

dizerque

o

"fundamento"

ara

o sentidondo

emerge

emdo

intelecto

em

da

imaginacdo,

mas

sim

da

responsabilidade

moral

ue

nos

obriga

cada um

diante

dos

outros

e,

para

Id

destas

obrigacoes

nfinitas,

os

compromete

om

a

justica

-

representada

o

principio

a

legalidade

da

equidade

-

requerida

engendrada

or

essas mesmasresponsabilidades. udo sto,para o autor, ao mesmotempo xpres-

*

University

f

North

arolina

Charlotte,

North

Carolina,

U.S.A.).

-

About

Levinas,

he uthor

of

the

rticle

writes:

Emmanuel

evinas

1906-1995)

s now

recognized

s

one

of

themost

minent

philosophers

nd Jewish

hinkers

f

the

wentieth

entury.

orn n

Kovno

Kaunas),

Lithuania;

uni-

versity

tudent

t

Strasburg

nd

Freiburg

under

Edmund

Husserl

nd

Martin

Heidegger);

rofessor

of philosophy

t

theuniversities

f

Poitiers,

Nanterre

nd

Paris-Sorbonne;

tudent

f

the

Talmudic

master

hoshani;

uthor

f

two

majorphilosophical

ooks,

Totality

nd

Infinity

1961)

and

Other-

wise than

Being

or

Beyond

Essence

(1974)

as

well s

numerous

works

n Jewish

hought;

ialogue

partner

ith

ope

John

aul

11;

director

f

the

prestigious

cole

Normale

sraelite

Orientale

n

Paris;

Levinaswas a central igurentherevival fJudaismnFrance.An orthodox ew, evinaswroten

French;

he

knew classical

Greek

and

Latin,

Russian,

biblical

and

modern

Hebrew,

Aramaic,

German,

rench,

nglish

and

Yiddish."

i r^n

©

Revista

Portuquesa

de Filosofia

P

171

j

i

DUrPF

r^n

62.2006

J481-490






^£2

Richard A. Cohen

sdo

consistente,

e

facto,

ma

expressdo rofundamente

adura a visdo tica

monoteistao Judaismo abinico

,

de uma

forma

mais

geral,

e toda

forma

e

consciencia

eligiosa

do

mitologica.

Palavras-Chave:

andamento; Ltica; udaismo;

ustiga;

ei; Levinas,

Emmanuel

(1906-1995);Monoteismo; bediencia; az;

Filosofia;Religido;Responsabili-

dade; Talmude;

eologia;

ora;

Universalismo.

Religion

s the excellence

proper

to

sociality

with the

Absolute,

or,

f

you

will,

n

the

positive

sense of the

expression,

Peace with the other. ..This

seems to me fundamental

o

the

Judaic

faith,

n which

the

relation o God is

inseparablefrom heTorah;that s, nseparablefrom herecognitionf the

other

person.

The relation o God

is

already

ethics; or,

as Isaiah 58 would

have

it,

the

proximity

o

God,

devotion

tself,

s devotion o the other

man.1

the

philosopher

nd

Jewish

hinker

mmanuel

evinas here s no

divorce

etween

hilosophy

nd

religion.

There s a communication

between aith

nd

philosophy/1

e

writes,

andnot

he

notorious

on-

flict. ommunication

n

bothdirections."2

o

doubt he

continuity

etween

the woderivesrom hefact hatJudaismsobligatedo no"theology/1ono

logos

r

dogma

n

conflict

ith

hilosophy.

udaism

s rather

way

of ife

n

covenant

ith

God,

nd suchcovenantal

ife

ncludes

nowledge,

eflection

and

questioning

thementalities

raditionally

ssociated

with

hilosophy.

But the

relationship

s

deeper.

hilosophy

nd

religion

re not

imply

nited

by

ife,

wo f he

many

ctivities

like

ports,

rt

r humor

of human ife.

For Levinasmonotheism

rovides

heultimate

ustification

or

hilosophy,

satisfyinghilosophy's

nnermost

emand

or

ustification,

ut

n

a

way

hat

philosophy

etached rom

eligion

s unable.

How s this

ossible?

Like

many

ewishhinkers

efore

im,

evinas

basic

message

s that eli-

gion

i.e.,

nstitutionally

ndorsed

elationships

ithGod) andethics i.e.,

morality

t the

nterpersonal

evel nd

ustice

t the

ocial

evel)

re

nextri-

cably

nited.

ndeed,

efore

hey

re

eparate

nd

reunited,

hey

orm

n nte-

gral

union.

The

elevation

f

genuine

iety

an neither

iscard

eligion

or

ethics

secular

humanism)

or

sacrifices

thics

or

eligion

Kierkegaard's

"knight

f

faith").

ather,

ne is

the

xpression

nd

fulfilmentf the

other,

and both

require

bedience o

Law. "The

ustice

rendered o

the

Other,

myneighbor,"

evinas

writes,

gives

me an

unsurpassable

roximity

o God.

1

Emmanuel

Levinas,

n theTime

f

he

Nations.Translated

y

M. Smith.

Bloomington:

ndiana

University

ress, 1994,

p.

171.

2

Id.,

n

the

Time

f

the

Nations,

p.

170.

Revista

Portuguesa

e Filosofia

rjg]

I

62.2006

LlHEEE

I

172






Emmanuel

Levinas:

Philosopher

nd Jew

403

...Thepiouspersons theustperson. usticesthe erm udaismreferso

termsmore

vocative f entiment."3

Speaking

venmore

broadly

f

the

ocial

or covenantal haracter f the

human

n

relationothe

divine,

evinas

writesn

Totality

nd

nfinity:

Every-

thing

hat

annot

e reduced o an inter-human

elation

epresents

otthe

superior

orm ut the forever

rimitive

orm f

religion."4

he

origin

f

theory

s not

imply

raxis,

s

Marx

hought;

or s

the

rigin

fboth

heory

and

praxis

more

rimordial

estheticsf ensation r

worldliness,

s Locke

and

Heidegger espectivelyhought.

ather

hey egin

nd

are

permeated

by

the

mperatives

f social ife s ethics.

rayer

nd

ritual,

moral are and

juridical tructures,s well s knowledgend scientificnquiryre all ven-

tures

n

a human

ociality

riven ot

bymyths

nd fantasies ut

byrespect

for thers.

The

primacy

f thics

metaphysics

s ethics was also the

position

aken

in

mid-nineteenth

entury ermany y

RabbiSamson

Raphael

Hirsch,

who

wrote: The

anctuary

f he

aw n

particular

nd theLaw ofGod

n

general,

strive

olely

ormoral

bjectives."5

he

primacy

f

ethics, hen,

s not the

invention

f the Renaissance r the

Enlightenment

r of Reformed nd

Liberal ranches f

religion,

or s t

merely

defensive

r

polemical osition

within aithful

rthodoxy.

o

obeymitzvot,

hedivine ommandments

all

of

which re also

"good

deeds"),

ikethe

compulsory

nnual

reading

f Torah

and

a

lifelong

almud

tudy,

equires

constant

enewal

n

the

present.

nly

in

this

way

re the ommandments

living,"

he

word f

"living

od,"

per-

ative

n

thecreated

world hat

God

Himself

eclares

good" ight

rom he

start.

n

this

way

ternity

nd time

ntersect,

equire

nd elicit ne another.

One

special

and

important

haracteristic

f Levinas

thought

s

that t

takes

hedialectic f tradition

preservationhrough

enewal

seriously

n

relation o themost

mportant

istoricalnd

ntellectualvents

f

the

wen-

tieth

entury.

uch

engagement

oes

not

date

his

thought,

owever,

aking

t

outdatedn thetwenty-firstentury.athert shows thepathofgenuine

3

Id,

Difficult

reedom.Translated

by

S. Hand. Baltimore:Johns

Hopkins University

ress,

1990,

p.

18.

4

Id.,

Totality

nd

Infinity.

ranslated

y

A.

Lingis.

The

Hague:

Martinus

Nijhoff,

969,

p.

79.

5

Samson

Raphael

Hirsch,

Jewish

ymbolism:

he Collected

Writings

olume II.

Translated

by

Paul

Forchheimer

nd Isaac

Levy.

New

York:

Philip

Feldheim,1984,

p.

60. More

recently,

nd

also

in

the

name oihalachic

Judaism,

liezer Berkovits

1908-1992)

has

also

defended

he

primacy

of ethics

n

critical

dialogue

withmodernJewish

hilosophers.

ee,

Eliezer

Berkovits,

ssential

Essays on Judaism.EditedbyD. Hazony.Jerusalem: halem Press,2002. In thephilosophical

tradition ne discoversthe

same

primacy

n

Plato,

n

the

very

form f his discourse:

dialogue.

And one finds

t

again,

to be

sure,

n

Kant. Of

course,

Aristotle

nd

Hegel, among

many

others,

will defend he

primacy

f a

purely

heoretical

irtue, .e.,

self-knowledge.

~

I

r>^|

Revista

Portuguesa

e Filosofia

j

173

I

LwIrPF

>^|

62-2006

|481-490






484

Richard

A. Cohen

thinking,hichbecomes ncreasinglyrofound hroughout

ts historical

unfolding,

ithout,

or ll

that,

osing

ts

perennial

ases and relevance.

Levinas

responded

nsightfully

o such

contemporary

vents s

WWI,

the

Russian

Revolution,WWII,

he

Holocaust,

uclear

weaponry,

he Stateof

Israel,

pace exploration,

nd

the

ike.His

philosophy

esponded

ritically

to the

various

hilosophical

ormulations

nd

deologies

hat

nderlay

hese

events nd that erved nd continue o serve

explicitly

nd

mplicitly)

s the

intellectualnvironmentfourtimes.

italism,ocialism,

iberalism,

emoc-

racy,

ascism,

henomenology,

xistentialism,

ermeneutics,

tructuralism

and deconstructionthese re the ntellectual

urrentsfthe

wentiethen-

tury.o be sure, hese hilosophiesre oftenxpressedna languagercane

and unknown o the

general ublic,

ut serious

hought

s

hardly

matter

of

ournalism

r

editorializing.

he

special

virtue

f Levinas

philosophy

s

that t

responds

and offers

positive

lternative

at the

highest

evel o the

highest

evel f

hought.

Levinas efends nd renews

specifically

ewish

ision,

riven

y

Torah,

Talmud nd rabbinic

ommentary,

hich s at once faithful

o

halachic

Judaism

i.e.,

normative,

rthodox r rabbinic

Judaism)

nd

relevant o

all

humanity.

o be

Jewish

nd

to be

human re

in no

way

contradictory

postures.

o

speak

the

anguage

f Judaism nd

to

speak

to all

humanity

arecompatible rojects. ertainlynLevinasshandsthey re.Indeed, he

language

f

humanity,

f

t is not to become

overly

bstract

nd

empty,

s

precisely

he

anguage

f

particularanguages

nd

particular

ommunities

of

speakers.

Jewish

niversalism,"

e

writes,

has

always

evealed

tself

n

particularism."6

fidelity

o Judaism hich s at once

a

fidelity

o

humanity

is

possible,

owever,

ot

s a

parochial witnessing,"

hichacks

ny

riteria

f

verifiability,

ut s an

exemplary

oral

esponsibility.

A

truths

universal,"

Levinas

ffirms,

when t

applies

to

every

easonable

eing.

A

religion

s

universal hen

t s

open

oall.

n

this

ense,

he

Judaism

hat inks he

Divine

to

themoralhas

always spired

o be

universal.

..This election s made

upnot f

privileges

ut f

responsibilities."7

Levinas

efends he

morality

nd

ustice

xalted

y

rabbinic udaism ot

with

rade

chool

implicities

ut

rather,

ike

MosesMaimonides

1

135-1204)

in

his

classic The Guide

for

he

Perplexed,

y responding

o and

utilizing

the

veryanguage

fthe

most lever ntellectualuses nd evasions f

today

various cultured

espisers

f

religion."

n thus

resenting

udaisms

a "reli-

gion

for

dults,"8

particular

ut

non-parochialeligion,

evinas efends

t

not

gainst

windmillsnd

maginary

nemies,

r

against

bsolete

hosts

who

6

Id.,

Difficult

reedom,

.

164.

7

Ibidem,

p.

21.

8

See, Id.,

"A

Religion

forAdults." n:

Difficult

reedom,

p.

1

1-23.

Revista

Portuguesa

e Filosofia

rwgi

1

62.2006

USRPF

wgi

I

174






Emmanuel Levinas:

Philosopher

nd Jew

40c

haunted imespast,but rather gainst hereal intellectualnd spiritual

options

hat

re

n

fact

educing

hefine

ntelligence

f

contemporaryewry

and

contemporary

umanity.

he devil

f

yesterday

s not hedevil f

today,

even

f

the

direction

e

points

s to remains he ame. No doubthe or she

now carries

credit ard and

can be found

hopping

ith

veryone

lse at

Malls.

No doubt

he

speaks hilosophy

oo,

nd can evenbe

"religious."

The

enemies

f

Judaism

nd of

religion

more

generally,

hether reli-

gious"

undamentalists,

gnostics,

theists,

r

simply

hosewhoare ndiffer-

ent,

ave aken

n new

guises,

reated ew

vocabularies,

nd

speak

he atest

lingo.

t is at the

deepest

evels

f

thought,

hen,

hat

evinas

teers course

betweenssimilationndalienation,enewinghemessage fJudaism or

Jews

nd

of thical

monotheism

or

he

wholeworld.

n

the

resent ay

world

of

ideas and

ideologies,

evinas

has

urged

Jews

hat

we mustreturn o

Jewish

wisdom;

this

s

why

n our recitation f this wisdomwe must

reawaken

he eason

hat

as

gone

o

sleep;

his s

why

heJudaism freason

must

ake

recedence

ver

heJudaismf

prayer;

heJew f heTalmudmust

take

precedence

ver

the Jew

f the Psalms."9

Note well: forLevinas he

"Judaism

f

reason"

s theJudaism

f theTalmud

0

And hereason f the

Talmud

what have

lsewhere

alled ethical

xegesis"

is for evinas

ar

closer

o

the lassical

wisdom f

Plato

han t s to themodern ationalism

of Spinoza r themirrormage) nti-rationalismf Derrida.

Levinas

oes

not

nvent

newethics

how absurd

2

(How

dangerous )

Rather,

e

traces

he rreducible

nd

unsurpassable riority

f ethical ran-

scendence

n

the

mperatives

f the

face" f theother

erson.

What

s

new,

first

f ll

and

as

I

have

ndicated,

rethe

pponents

f

monotheism,

ho re

no

longer

onfined

o the

quaint

but

obsolete

igures

f

pagan

dolaters

r

superstitious

impletons,

hough

hese

too, alas,

find heir

ontemporary

avatars.

n

our

world,

he

modern

orld,

he Western"

lobal

world,

hemost

sophisticated

nd

dangerous

pposition

o

religious-ethical

ife omes

from

two elated ronts.

First,

heres

the ise

f

modern

cience,

which

n

ts

egitimate

earch or

verifiable

vidence

eepens

n ancient

Hellenic

isdain

or

iblical

wisdom

with

newdisdain

or he

notions

f

purpose

nd

value

ltogether.

econd,

and

n a

seeming aradox,

here s

therise

f

relativism,

oth

ubjective

nd

9

Id.,

Difficult

reedom,

.

271.

10

For

Levinas,

who was

both a

university rofessor

nd Director

f a Jewish

raining

chool

for eachers

f

Judaism,

he

Talmud

s "thebasis

of all Jewish

ducation";

ee

Difficult

reedom,

p.

287.

1

See,RichardA.Cohen,Ethics, xegesis ndPhilosophy:nterpretationfterevinas.Chicago:

University

f

Chicago

Press,

200

1

12

Kant

expresses

his

ame

view,

he

bsurdity

r

creating

new

ethics,

n

a

footnote

o one or

his ethical

writings.

;

I

pwgi

Revista

Portuguese

e

Filosofia

I

175

I

LlJRPF

wgi

62.2006

1481-490






aos

Richard

A.

Cohen

social,psychologismndhistoricism.he twodangersrerelated ecause

science

hat

enies

hevalue

ofvalues

n

thename

of

realist

bjectivism

ro-

duces,

s a

necessary y-product,

subjectivism

fvalues.

f values re not

real or

true,

n other

words,

hey

must

be

merely ubjective

nd

arbitrary.

If

Lockecelebrates

primary

ualities,"

nevitably

Nietzsche

ill

elebrate

"secondary

ualities."

eibniz,

efore

ietzsche,

o

Ernst assirer eaches

s,

had

already limpsed

hat

o evenmake

uch distinction

s to reduce hem

both o

anthropology.

For

Levinas,

however,

alues are

very

eal,

or,rather,

hey

re not real

at all:

they

re

better,

igher,

ore

pressing

han hedemands

f

reality

r

thecuriosityfknowledge.The mpossibilityfkilling,"evinaswrites

succinctly,

isnot

eal,

ut

moral."

4

The

hardwon nd now

pervasive

uccess

ofmodern

ciencehas

falsely

ccustomed

s to

taking

the

eal"

especially

what an be

objectified

ia

quantity

nd measure

as the tandard fvalues.

It is an old

association,

eriving

rom ncient

Greece:

what s best

must e

what s most

eal,

nd

what s most

eal s what

ationalitytodays mpirical

objective

ciences)

ays

s real.

Allof

contemporary

hought

s an effort

o

come

o terms

ith his

eduction,

his xile fvalues.

But

nstead

f

xasper-

ating

t,

or

celebrating

t,

or retreated

efore

t,

only

he

hought

f Levinas

has

overcome he

hegemony

f "value

ree" cience

ll the

way

to its roots.

It has donethisneithernthenameof a deepernotion fbeing,whether

Bergson

elan

vital r

Heidegger's

ntological

ifference,

or

n

the

name f

more nclusive

nowledge,

hether usserls

phenomenology

r Foucault

archeology,

or,

inally,

as it

escaped

n

the

llegedly

layful

ameof ess

stable

anguage,

hether

ietzsche's

ominalismr

Derridas

ifference,

ut

rather otherwise

han

being

nd

beyond

ssence"

it

has done

so

in

the

name

f more undamental

nderstanding

f

thics.

Let us not

forget

hat his

olution,

he

ethical,

s farfrom bvious

r

self-evident.

everal

lternatives,

worldviews"

some

brought

o mind

by

thepropernames ustmentioned),ave offeredhemselvess competing

"solutions"o the

problem

fvalue.

will

briefly

ention

hree,

hich label

scientism,

estheticism

nd

nfantilism.

The

first, cientism,

esolves o be scientific

o the end. Science and

nothing

ut

cience

resents

he ruth

f

reality.

he

true s real ndthe eal s

true.

All

the

rest s

illusion, rror,

gnorance

the

"not

yet"

cientific. he

problem

ith his

iew, owever,

s that cience emains

bstinately

lind o

itsown

nability

o

scientificallyustify

ts

original

esolution,

tsownunsci-

entificaithn science. cience enies alues ut

till

alues

tself

13

See the brilliant

nalyses

of Ernst

Cassirer,

he

Philosophy

f

the

Enlightenment.

ranslated

by

F.

C.

A.

Koellin

& J. P.

Pettegrove.

rinceton: rinceton

University

ress, 1968,

pp.

114-120.

14

E.

Levinas,

Difficult

reedom,

.

10.

Revista

Portuguesa

e Filosofia

pj^I j

62.2006

Portuguesa

pj^I

UJRPF

|

j

176






Emmanuel Levinas:

Philosopher

nd

Jew

437

Aestheticism,n contrast,laims that cientificnowledges a limited

form

"slavish"

ays

Nietzsche)

fthe

magination,

hich

s

then nstalled

n

the

hegemonic

lace

denied

o

science.

Here

the

rtist,

he reator

f

values,

whether

person

r a

projected

erson

Heidegger

alls

it

"being"

r

"£5

gibt"),

eigns

upreme.

Unfortunately,

multiplicity

f

incompatible

nd

conflicting

iewpoints

esults

rom his ubstitution.

ach

ultimately

eeks

its

"day

n the

un"

by

meansof a

violence overt

r hidden

that,

aving

rejected

he

objectivity

f

science,

ach acks

the

wherewithalo criticize

r

morally

esist.

The third solution"

s a

stultifying

nd

obstinate etreat

nto

pre-modern

ignorance.utunable oanswer ven hemost ommon ense uestions ith

regard

o

scientific

ruths,

he

dherents

f this strich

ike

position

nd

up

silencing

hose

who sk them.

None

of

theseworldviews

popular

r

sophisticated

hough

hey

an be

-

are

able

to

satisfy

he

mature,

ober and

worldly

wisdom

of

normative

Judaism.

Hebrew

tudies,"

evinashas

written,

do

not

bring

man to an

exotic

wisdom,

ut

reawaken

ne of

the ouls

ofhis

soul.

They

herald

man

freed

rom

myths

nd

identify

pirit

with

ustice,"15

cience

without alues

cannot

e

total.

Aestheticism

ithout

riteria

annot

ontrol

iolence.nfan-

tilism

ithoutruth

r

reality

s enslavement.

he

unacknowledged

otor f

all threes anethics owhich hey efuse voice.

The

task

Levinas

ets for

himselfs

to enter

nto he

heart

f the most

sophisticated

wentieth

entury

hilosophical

justifications"

or he bove

three

worldviews

nd

to

expose

hem at close

quarters,

n ntimate

erms

for heir

nadequacies.

e reveals

heir

vert nd

atent

goism.

Andhe does

this

not

by

iting

he

Bibleor

telling

ales

f

pious

rabbis r

raising

is

voice,

but

by ngaging

nd

challenging

he

most dvanced

iscourses

f

contempo-

rary

hilosophy

nd

Western

ivilization.

For

Levinas

he

ery

umanity

f

hehuman

s constituted

s a

moral ela-

tion an "inter-subjective"elation requiringindnesso one neighbors

and

ustice

for ll.

Instead

f

thinking

f humans

s real

beings

who

take

on moral

behavior

s

a

gloss,

r as

intellects

urpassing

ommon

morality,

Levinas

onceives

f

humans

s

moral

beings

or

whom

hereal

-

both

s

science

nd

culture

takes

on sense based

upon personal

esponsibility,

moral

bligations

nd

ustice.

Not

freedom

nd culture

ut

responsibility

nd

justice

ie at

theheart

f

human

elfhood.

Such

a

perspective

emands

radical

eorientation

n

philosophy

nd

the

Western

cientific

utlook

s a

whole.

Socrates,

etaining

is distance

n

thefreedom

f

thought,

aid

that

one

must

know he

good

to

do the

good."

Levinas, aithfulothedecisive eclarationf heJewst Mount inai:unase

15

Ibidem,

p.

276.

"1

r>gi

Revista

Portuguesa

e Filosofia

I

'

'

177

I

UJRPF

r>gi

62-2006

J481-490






4gg

Richard

A. Cohen

v'nishmah"Exodus24:7),"Wewilldo andbe obedient,"nd to all genuine

religious

obedience,"

ays

one must o the

good

to know he

good.Obeying

the rder

f

goodness

s tobe neither

gnorant

or

duped,

ut obecome

ne's

unique

human elf.

I

am

irreplaceable

n

my

ssumption

f

responsibility.

Being

chosen nvolves

surplus

f

obligations

or

which he

T

of moral

consciousness

peaks."

6

Moral lection

s not n

easypath.

t

requires

ffort

to

help

others nd effort

o

keep

oneself

morally

eady

o

help

thers. thics

and

religion o

hand

n

hand.

The aw

is effort."evinas

lso

writes,

The

daily

fidelity

o theritual

esture

emands

courage

hat

s

calmer,

obler

and

greater

han hat f

hewarrior.

TheTalmudistoes

nothesitate

o

ink

this oyal wakeningo the overeignower'fa people apableofthedaily

ritual.

..The law for heJew

s never

yoke.

t carries

ts own

oy,

which

nourishes

religious

ife..."

7

The

oy

s not

he xuberance

f nimal

itality,

and

certainly

ot

nypleasure

n

domination,

utrather

he

heightened

nd

grateful

onsciousnessfcontribution

service

o

others,

nd

hence ervice

to God.

The

Hebrew

Bible advocates

hat ne "love

your

neighbor

s

yourself."

Levinas

omments

hat he rue

meaning

f his

xpression

s that

oving

ne's

neighbor

s oneself. he

human annot

e

grasped

n

thebasisof

reality

s

determined

y

cience

r a

reality

s determined

y

culture

nd tsrhetoric.

Rather,hehuman s called o bebetter,alled o andas the ask fredeeming

the

world

hrough orality

nd

ustice.

uch s

the

highest

ask

f

humanity,

the

"definition,"

r rather

he election f

humanity

nd

the source

of all

meaning,

ncluding

ll scientific

nd cultural

meanings.

t

is

a

joy

in

the

humility

f

giving

ather han

eceiving.

It is

noteworthy

hat or evinas ven

he nfinite

bligations

f

morality,

the ver

nadequate

eedsof

kindness

ne

person erforms

or

nother,

he

obligations

hat o onecan fulfill

ully

ut

hat

o onecan

rightly

hirk

even

these

bligations

re nsufficiento thehuman ask.

here s a

difference,

hat

is to

say,

etween

morality

nd

ustice.

f

give verything

o

my

neighbor

then amneglectingtherswho are notpresent.Morality,ith ts nfinite

obligations,

s not

nough

heworld s not Garden

f

Eden;

there re

more

than wo

people

n

theworld. here re

many: amily,

riends,

ommunities,

countries

nd

humanity

s a

whole,

nd

each

requires

tsfair hare.

ven

f

I

give verything

even

my

ife to and

for

nother,

stillhaveno

right

o

remain

ndifferent

o

theharm hat nother

may

uffer rom

third

arty.

To

give

fair hare o others nd to

protect

he ther

erson

rom

thers,

equal

treatmentnder aw s

required.

urthermore,

ll the

uantitative

nd

rational

esources

f

modern cience re

required

o

equitably

istribute

food,

lothing,

tc.;

o

transport

oods;

o ncrease

gricultural

nd manufac-

16

Ibidem,

p.

177.

17

Ibidem,

p.

19.

Revista

Portuguesa

e Filosofia

rj&\ j

62.2006

ortuguesa

UJRPF

j&\ j

I

178






Emmanuel Levinas:

Philosopher

nd

Jew

^g^

turingroductivity,tc. n otherwords, cience, roperlynderstood,s far

from

eing

n

enemy

f

value.

Rather,

ts rue

ocations to be

in

the

ervice

of

ustice.

his

nsight

s

mportant

n

our

day

fdisenchantmentith

cience.

Yes,

cience s notthe

lpha

and

omega

hat ts

early

nthusiasts

hought

t

might

e. But

no,

it is not therefore

sham.

Morality,

o be

fair,

equires

justice;ustice,

o

be

possible, equires nowledge

nd

science.Value s there-

fore

ot

supplement

o modern

cience;

t

s its

very

aison 'etre.

Weapons,

scientificallyroduced,

an

kill,

utmedical

quipment

nd

training,

cientif-

ically roduced,

an heal.And

weapons,

n

our

unredeemed

orld,

an also

protect

nnocent

ictims.

tthebottom f science the

veryustification

f

science lies ervice o usticewhichs basedon anirreducible oral bliga-

tion o ove he

neighbor

s oneself.18

I

will onclude

eginning

ith citation

y

Levinas,

aken rom n article

devoted o thebiblical

xpression

in

the

mage

of God"

Genesis

:26)

as

found

n

Rabbi

Hayyim

fVolozhins

efesh

a

Hayyim,

nd

testifying

o the

unsurpassablemport

fhuman

esponsibility:

Man

occupies

n

exceptional

place.Everything

epends

n

him

who s at the

bottom,

n

contactwith he

matter

n

whichhis actions re carried ut.

..The roots f his soul1

each

the

op

of the

hierarchy.

..There

s here n

ethical

ignificance

o

religious

commandments:

hey

mount

o

etting

hosewho are

other han elf ither

live r,nthe ase of ransgression,ie.Does not hebeing fman mount o

being-for-the-other?

an

exercises

is

mastery

nd

responsibility

s mediator

between lokim

God]

and the

worlds

y ensuring

he

presence

r absence

ofElokim...

his

mastery

s

interpreted

ithout esitations

responsibility.

...

Mans

nteriority

erives

rom is

responsibility

or heuniverse.

he

power

of God subordinated

o

responsibility

ecomes

moral orce.Man does not

sin

against

God

whenhe

disobeys

ommandments;

e

destroys

orlds."19

Each

human s

a moralAtlas

upon

whose shoulders

estsGod creation.

The

prophet

Micah

expressed

his ame

thought:

What oes the Lord

require fyoubut todo justice, ndto ovekindness,ndto walkhumbly

with

our

God?"

Micah

:8).

Wewould

omment:

o

walk

humbly

ithGod

is

to

ovekindness

nd thereforeo do

ustice.

Mercy

without

ustice

s mere

sentiment,

elpless gainst

he

nslaughts

f

violence.

ustice ithout

mercy

is

inhuman,

bstract

nd

rigid.

Both without

God become

arrogance.

Together ercymorality

n theface f

he

ther

erson)

nd

ustice

law

and

equality)

stablish

he

Kingdom

f God on

earth,

or uch

a

"kingdom"

s

18

On

morality

nd

ustice

n

Levinas see the

excellent ook

by RogerBurggraeve,

he Wisdom

of

Love n the ervice

f

Love: EmmanuelLevinas

on

Justice, eace,

and Human

Rights.

ranslated

bv Jeffreyloechl.Milwaukee,MarquetteUniversity ress,2002.

19

Emmanuel

Levinas,

Beyond

heVerse. ranslated

y

G. Mole.

Bloomington:

ndiana Univer-

sity

Press, 1994,

pp.

159,160, 161, 162;

Levinas also

wrote Preface o the French

translation

f

Nefesh

a

Hayyim.

aGrasse:

Verdier, 986,

pp.

vii-x.

X

[>sgi

Revista

Portuguesa

e Filosofia

I

179 I UiRPF

>sgi

62.2006

1

81-490






490

Richard

A.

Cohen

nothingther han thebrotherhoodf man"foundnthepeace (shalom)

that

espects

ather

han

educes

ifference.

To

put

heother efore he

elf s not o diminish

ut o

elevate he

elf.

n

turning

tself

nside-out,

s it

were,

or he

ther,

he elf ises o

the

esponsi-

bilities hat onstitute

ts

very umanity.

uch

elevation

s

holy,

or

t rises

above

being

which ims

only

o

persevere

n

conatus

ssendi)

r

aggrandize

more

"will

o

power") eing.

t s a kind f

miracle

without

mystification

in

being,

n election

igher

han

eing,

demand

or elf-sacrifice

voked

y

and

put

nto

uestion y

the ther.

uch a

response-ability

equires

armore

than

ofty

entiments

r beatific

eelings,

or

t s theothers

material

eeds,

the ufferingftheother,evinasnsists,hat onstitutehe piritual eeds

of

thehuman elf.

To care for he

"widow,

he

orphan,

he

tranger"

efore

oneself

s to

feed,

loth,house,

to

provide

ducation,

obs,

public

safety,

health

are,

old

age

security,olitical

nfranchisement

nd

ustice

for ll.20

All

of theworld value nd

meaning

from

he

ntimate

ighs

f ove

to the

universal

ymbols

f

mathematicsstands

r falls n the

houlders f

these

very ressing istorically

oncrete

esponsibilities.

Vaclav

Havel,

former resident

f

theCzech

Republic,

nderstood

his,

and understoodts

nner

elation

o the

pirit

f

Europe

s the

ntegral

eir

f

both

Athensnd

Jerusalem,

henhe

spoke

he

following

ords

o theFrench

Senate,nParis,nan address eliveredn March ,1999:

Four

years ago

a

LithuanianJew died who had studied

n

Germany

o

eventually

become

renowned

rench

hilosopher.

is

name

was Emmanuel

evinas.Guided

by

the

pirit

ftheoldest

European

raditions,

pparently

ost

f ll

by

Jewish

raditions,

he

taught

hat

he

ense

of

responsibility

or heworld

s born n us with

look nto he

faceof fellow uman

being.21

The face

of theother

erson

s not maskfor hidden

God. The

singu-

larity

f each other s nota flaw r failure

n

being

o

be

sublated.

Rather,

in

the

particular esponsibilities

nd

obligations

and

the

ustice

a

face

calls

forth,

n the

giving

hat ach

face,

ach

person

n his or her

ingularity,

elicits,what arises is thevery nspiration,hevery levation, hevery

epiphany

f

God on earth.

n

theface

f

the

ther,

n

each others

rreducible

alterity,

ncountered

thically,

etter

han

eing,

here s traced

n

earth

re-

cisely

he

image

nd ikeness fGod."

20

WhileLevinas

supports

he "liberal tate"

which

he describes

s "the

modality ccording

o

which

he

conjunction

f

politics

nd ethics s

intrinsicallyossible."

Emmanuel

Levinas,

Outside

the

Subject.

Translated

by

M.

B. Smith. Stanford:Stanford

University

ress,

1994,

p.

123,

he

conceives t

n

terms f a

socially

responsible

iberalism.Hence it would be closer

to the iberal-

ism of T. H.

Green,

s found

n

his Lectures n the

Principles

f

Political

Obligation.

dited

by

Paul

Harris nd JohnMorrow. ambridge:CambridgeUniversityress,1986,rather hanthe classical

or

individualistic aissez-faire iberalism of John Stuart

Mill or of

those

who

style

hemselves

"neo-conservatives"

n

America

oday.

21

Vaclav

Havel,

address to the French

Senate,

March

3, 1999,

Paris.

Revista

Portuguesa

e Filosofia

rj^l

I

62-2006

Portuguesa

rj^l

UiRPF I 180

Responsibility and Justice in Levinas

Documents

Transcript of Responsibility and Justice in Levinas