This contribution shows how the Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas has been confronted autobiographically with National-Socialism (1933-1945) and how his personal experience and the experience of the Jewish people under Hitlerism were translated in his philosophical understanding of ‘being’ as ‘il y a’ (in English: ‘there is’). The Holocaust provides a unique negative point of entry to understand Levinas’ ontological category which is as such not understandable since in the il y a, there is no longer a subject that stands before (...) the objectivity of reality. On the contrary, the il y a is exactly the category that expresses a situation where the subject itself has no longer the ‘right’ to exist as such but still does not stop to exist. This violence of being is exactly what Hitlerism wanted to do in creating the Holocaust and submitting the Jewish people to it. This makes understandable how the whole philosophy of Levinas is an effort to overcome the il y a through a moral answer to the Holocaust. (shrink)

RÉSUMÉ Cet article analyse le problème de la souffrance dans l'œuvre de Lévinas à la lumière de la critique nietzschéenne de la compassion. Il s'agit dans un premier temps de montrer que, bien que la description que fait Lévinas de la souffrance éthique soit similaire à l'idée nietzschéenne de la souffrance tragique ou inutile, les premiers écrits de Lévinas se concentrent aussi sur les dangers politiques qui resultent de la conception nietzschéenne du corps et de sa vision tragique de la (...) souffrance. Dans un second temps, cet article se propose de montrer que la souffrance éthique telle que la décrit Lévinas ne correspond pas à la façon dont Nietzsche décrit la compassion comme étant une forme de nihilisme. Il soutient au contraire l'idée que la souffrance éthique chez Lévinas permet d'aller plus loin dans la conception qu'a Nietzsche de l'amitié et de la vie ABSTRACT This article analyses the problem of suffering in Lévinas's work in the light of Nietzsche's critic of compassion. It argues, in a first step, that although Lévinas's description of ethical suffering is similar to Nietzsche's description of suffering as tragic or useless, Lévinas's first writings also focus on the political dangers associated with Nietzsche's conception of the body and of a purely tragic conception of suffering. In a second step, this article shows that the question of ethical suffering, such as Lévinas describes it, does not match Nietzsche's conception of compassion as being a form of nihilism, but, on the contrary, allows for the radicalization of some of Nietzsche's views on friendship and of life. (shrink)

In light of the theme and concerns of the present collection of essays, we may ask whether ‘distance in general’, and ‘critical distance in particular’, has truly disappeared with postmodernity. Proposing an immediate and interruptive political engagement with local issues, Jacques Rancière’s articulation of political mobilisation does seem to confirm this claim. Upon further inspection, however, his emancipatory politics repeat the same mistake of valuing an abstract universal at the expense of a concrete particular, however paradoxical this may seem at (...) first sight. The present article develops this thesis in three moments. On the first hand, it highlights Rancière’s notion of conflict as being institutive of politics. Secondly, it connects this ‘sensible’, and Rancière’s understanding of politics as being aesthetic, to Kant’s ‘Transcendental Aesthetics’. The French author sees in the leading section of the first Critique the grounding possibility of freeing up time and space within the social realm; the representation of a common political surface that can be reshaped; political equality; emancipation. The last section shows how this recourse to the transcendental subject in Rancière’s politics follows and embraces a traditional position in the history of philosophy whereby identity is denigrated at the profit of a disembodied universalism. (shrink)

La formulación tradicional de los derechos humanos se basa en la libertad y la igualdad, pero Emmanuel Lévinas hace de la diferencia absoluta la fuente y el fundamento de tales derechos. Los Derechos Humanos aparecen entonces como los derechos del Otro y extienden el alcance de la responsabilidad hasta comprometer la propia libertad. La primera parte de este trabajo muestra cómo la preocupación por los derechos humanos fue una constante en la existencia y el pensamiento de Lévinas. La segunda parte (...) está dedicada a exponer la fundamentación levinasiana de los derechos humanos con base en la illeidad. (shrink)

Dialogo filosofijos mąstytojų Rosenzweig‘o ir Levino darbų esmė – mirties bedugnės ir asmens tapatumo santykis. Rosenzweig‘as niekį laiko galutiniu kantiškojo mąstymo tašku. Mirtis, kaip egzistencinis niekio patyrimas, buvo laikoma kiekvieno žmogaus realybe sudėtingu amžių sandūros laikotarpiu. Rosenzweig‘ui niekis buvo atspirties taškas, permąstant ir siekiant išsaugoti asmens tapatumą. Asmens tapatumas apsaugo nuo niekio, tačiau jis taip pat yra atviras pokyčiams. Savo ankstyvuosiuose tekstuose Levinas daro panašias prielaidas, laikydamas Buvimą asmens tapatumo pradžia. Levinas plėtojo dialektinę fenomenologiją pradėdamas nuo mirties. Asmens tapatumas traktuojamas (...) kaip hipostazė, tačiau Levino darbe „Totalité et Infini“ įvyksta svarbus lūžis – jame asmens tapatumo šaltiniu laikomas troškimas. Buvimas tampa dėmesio centru kaip antroji elementale pusė, o asmens tapatumas suvokiamas kaip atsiskyrimas. (shrink)

Según Foucault, a partir del siglo XVIII la cuestión de la vida fue conectándose con la esfera de la acción política. La política del nazismo adopta los procesos biológicos como criterio rector de las acciones. Según Roberto Esposito, lo fundamental del nazismo es la vida, su sujeto es la raza y su léxico la biología. Al exterminio de judíos, y de los tipos humanos asimilables a éste, se le asignará una finalidad terapéutica. En su esencia biocrítica, el nazismo permanece mudo (...) para la filosofía política clásica. Heidegger, no obstante haber apoyado al Führer, llevó a cabo un enfrentamiento filosófico con el nazismo al constatar la pérdida de la capacidad explicativa de las categorías clásicas de la filosofía. (shrink)

The paper is focused on Genesis 1 – 3 where the primordial man [adàm] is created ‎and he was given the proper name Adam [adàm]. ‎ In Hebrew man and Adam are the same word, spelled the same way – [adàm]. ‎Different translations of Genesis 1-3 use for the first time the proper name Adam in ‎different places versions Gen 2:25; The German Luther ‎Bible Gen 3:8; Some English Protestant versions Gen 3:17; Bulgarian Protestant and many ‎English Protestant versions Gen (...) 3:20-21). The paper decodes the phenomenon by ‎studying the Hebrew original and several semiotic views on common and proper names ‎‎. Through these opinions the ‎important question “Who wrote the Bible?” is discussed. The analysis interfaces the new ‎linguistic relativity theory.‎ Four layers of symbolism are decoded: 1. The man became Adam; 2. The two men in ‎Gen 1:27 and in Gen 2:7 man [adàm] ‎is made by earth, ground [adamà]; 3. The two men in the New Testament ; 4. Edom, Adam and cultural discourses in both Testaments.‎. (shrink)