Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:47:28.782Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Subjectivity and Transcendence: The Primacy of Truth and Goodness in Hegel and Levinas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2018

Anne Clausen
Anne Clausen*
Affiliation:
Göttingen University, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The Hegelian concept, with its all-encompassing power, epitomizes the kind of totality-oriented thinking that Levinas, a philosopher of genuine alterity, sharply criticizes. This paper investigates this antagonism by focusing on a notion that is pivotal for both authors, the notion of subjectivity. Hegel makes transcendence into an immanent dimension of the subject whereas Levinas conceives transcendence as the subject’s relation with radical exteriority. The decisive question is whether Levinas falls back into the failures of so-called ‘philosophies of reflection’ or whether the Hegelian dialectic of being and nothing relies on an un-condition for which it does not and indeed cannot account. The paper culminates in the thesis that Hegel and Levinas reverse the order of priority of the Good and the True. While Hegel conceives of the absolute as system of truth, for Levinas the ethical ‘failure’ of totalization constitutes a necessary condition for rationality.

Type
Articles
Information
Hegel Bulletin , Volume 39 , Special Issue 2: Hegel and Twentieth-Century French Philosophy , October 2018 , pp. 199 - 220
Copyright
© The Hegel Society of Great Britain 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Atterton, P. (2001), ‘From Transcendental Freedom to the Other: Levinas and Kant’, in M. New, with R. Bernasconi and R. A. Cohen (eds.), In Proximity: Emmanuel Levinas and the Eighteenth Century. Texas: Tech University Press.Google Scholar
Basterra, G. (2015), The Subject of Freedom. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
Bernasconi, R. (2002), ‘What is the Question to which “Substitution” is the Answer?’, in S. Critchley and R. Bernasconi (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Levinas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bernasconi, R. (1986), ‘Hegel and Levinas. The Possibility of Forgiveness and Reconciliation’, Archivio di Filosofia 54: 325–346.Google Scholar
De Boer, T. (1986), ‘An Ethical Transcendental Philosophy’, in R. A. Cohen (ed.), Face to Face with Levinas. Albany: SUNY.Google Scholar
Bowman, B. (2013), Hegel and the Metaphysics of Absolute Negativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Critchley, S. (1999), Ethics-Politics-Subjectivity: Essays on Derrida, Levinas and Contemporary French Thought. London and New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Düsing, K. (1995), Das Problem der Subjektivität in Hegels Logik. Systematische und entwicklungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zum Prinzip des Idealismus und zur Dialektik, Hegel-Studien Beiheft 15. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. (2006), Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. (2007), Was ist Metaphysik?. Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar
Houlgate, S. (2006), The Opening of Hegel’s Logic. From Being to Infinity. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar
Iber, C. (2000a), ‘In Zirkeln ums Selbstbewusstsein. Bemerkungen zu Hegels Theorie der Subjektivität’, Hegel-Studien 35: 51–75.Google Scholar
Iber, C. (2000b), ‘Kleine Einführung in Hegels Logik’, in A. Arndt and C. Iber (eds.), Hegels Seinslogik. Interpretationen und Perspektiven. Berlin: Akademie.Google Scholar
Khurana, T. (2017), Das Leben der Freiheit . Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Khurana, T. and Menke, C. (2011), Paradoxien der Autonomie. Freiheit und Gesetz I. Berlin: August.Google Scholar
Kreß, A. (1996), Reflexion als Erfahrung. Hegels Phänomenologie der Subjektivität. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann.Google Scholar
Peperzak, A. T. (1986), ‘Some Remarks on Hegel, Kant, and Levinas’, in C. E. Katz with L. Trout (eds.), Emmanuel Levinas: Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Peperzak, A. T. (2000), ‘Anerkennung im Werk von Emmanuel Levinas’, in W. Schild (ed.), Anerkennung. Interdisziplinäre Dimensionen eines Begriffs. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1999), The Construction of Reality in the Child. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schäfer, R. (2000), Die Logik und ihre besonderen Formen in Hegels Logik. Entwicklungsgeschichtliche und systematische Untersuchungen. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Schick, S. (2010), Contradictio est regula veri. Die Grundsätze des Denkens in der formalen, transzendentalen und spekulativen Logik. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Stekeler-Weithofer, P. (1992), ‘Verstand und Vernunft. Zu den Grundbegriffen der Hegelschen Logik’, in C. Demmerling (ed.), Vernunftkritik nach Hegel. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Zeleny, J. (1978), ‘Verstand und Vernunft in Hegels Wissenschaft der Logik und in der materialistischen Dialektik’, in D. Henrich (ed.), Hegels Wissenschaft der Logik: Formation und Rekonstruktion. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar