Intimacy and sexuality expressed by nursing home residents with dementia remains an ethically sensitive issue for care facilities, nursing staff and family members. Dealing with residents’ sexual longings and behaviour is extremely difficult, putting a burden on the caregivers as well as on the residents themselves and their relatives. The parties in question often do not know how to react when residents express themselves sexually. The overall aim of this article is to provide a number of clinical-ethical considerations addressing the (...) following question: ‘How can expressions of intimacy and sexuality by residents with dementia be dealt with in an ethically responsible way?’ The considerations formulated are based on two cornerstones: the current literature on older peoples’ experiences regarding intimacy and sexuality after the onset of dementia, and an anthropological-ethical framework addressing four fundamental pillars of human existence namely the decentred self, human embodiment, being-in-the-world and being-with-others. The resulting considerations are oriented toward the individual sphere, the partnership sphere, and the institutional sphere. The continuous interaction between these spheres leads to orientations that both empower the residents in question and respect the complex network of relationships that surrounds them. (shrink)

Contemporary bioethics pays considerable attention to the ethical aspects of dementia care. However, ethical issues of sexuality especially as experienced by institutionalized persons with dementia are often overlooked. The relevant existing ethics literature generally applies an implicit philosophical anthropology that favors the principle of respect for autonomy and the concomitant notion of informed consent. In this article we will illustrate how this way of handling the issue fails in its duty to people with dementia. Our thesis is that a more (...) inclusive philosophical anthropology is needed that also heeds the fate of this growing population. Drawing on the tradition of phenomenology, we will chalk out an anthropological framework that rests on four fundamental characteristics of human existence: the decentered self, human embodiment, being-in-the-world and being-with-others. Our aim in this article is thus to tentatively put forward a broader perspective for looking at aged sexuality in institutionalized people with dementia. Hopefully the developed framework will mark the beginning of a new and refreshed ethical reflection on the topic at hand. (shrink)

As such, this book is both a critique and a tribute to Rosenzweig and Levinas. The book contains an exhaustive bibliography of the comparative studies.

The Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, in his Homo Sacer-cycle, has developed a new paradigm for thinking the Shoah. Departing from Michel Foucault’s biopolitical thought, he argues that modern political power is made possible by the helix-structure of sovereign power and homo sacer. Sovereign power is situated at the threshold of the prevailing juridico-political order and can, in a state of exception, violently suspend or establish the law. In this decision, homo sacer is legally excluded from the law. When the state (...) of exception is made general, the law of sovereignty governs all life and everyone becomes homo sacer. This happened concretely in the Shoah. In the concentration camps, the Muselmann is produced. During the Shoah by Bullet, as happened in Lithuania, the generalised sovereign biopolitics turns into radical thanatopolitics. (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)

The parable “Before the Law” is a pivotal text in the work of Franz Kafka. It tells of a man who looks for the law as the quintessence of his life. But his quest for meaning comes to a crisis because of a fundamental deception. Instead of interpreting the law as a personal mystery, he somehow objectifies it. His abstract view on life begets the obstacle-character that embodies all those who could bar him from finding the law. In this narrative, (...) the failure of finding the law results in a murder in which human life is reduced to bestial death. In this sense, Kafka’s narrative is a tale of anti-creation. In a close reading we analyze the text with attention for the ternary structure, i.e. the intertwined complex of the I-Thou relation and the I-It relation. The literary text is interpreted for its philosophical relevance. Franz Rosenzweig and Emmanuel Levinas but also Gilles Deleuze and Jacques Derrida have an important role in this way of reading. (shrink)

Studie over het werk van de Joodse filosoof (1886-1929).

Bijdragen over de visie van de Frans-joodse filosoof (1906-1995) op het kwaad.

The destruction of man in the Shoah or Holocaust did not mean that Levinas argues in favor of turning away from the socio-historical reality to cultivate his own little garden. The deepest truth of subjectivity can be found in an alterity that calls for a socio-political responsibility. The political implications are rooted in different layers of Levinas’s thought. In his Talmudic comments, Levinas questions the reality of war as the truth of politics. But his explorations of subjectivity, ethical relationality and (...) society allow to understand different political options such as contract theory, liberation philosophy and human rights and the necessity of building a just society. Paradoxically, a just and equitable society ignores the uniqueness of the unique other. While organized responsibility is necessary, it introduces a new form of violence. In this article, we bring together the different layers in Levinas’s political vision and we explore its limits. A fundamental question is whether Levinas’s vision of politics is based on ethics or whether his ethics is a critique of politics. (shrink)

A comparative study of Plato's "Republic" and Rozenzweig's "Stern der Eriösung" proposed that the way of speaking determines which reality can be spoken and what types of relationality are possible. Rhetorical analysis shows that Plato's philosophy of language, in contrast to Rozenzweig's, undervalues the relational possibilities of time, alterity, and language. This is revealed through a study of the place and significance of the genera of arts for thinking and society.

The relation between the abyss of death and the human identity is constitutive for the thought of the dialogical thinkers Rosenzweig and Levinas. For Rosenzweig, the Nothing is the end-point of Kantian thinking. Death, as existential experience of this nothingness, was the reality of everyman during the violent decades at the turn of the century. Rosenzweig took this nothingness as starting-point for rethinking and safeguarding human identity. Human identity is a dam against nothingness. But human identity is also open to (...) alterity. In his early texts, Levinas makes a similar move. The there is is the starting point of human identity. Levinas develops a dialectical phenomenology starting from death. Human identity is interpreted as hypostasis. But in Totalité et Infini, an important shift takes place. The starting point is now found in human identity as desire. The there is comes to the center as flip side of the elementale and human identity is interpreted as separation. (shrink)

The point of departure is the empirical research by Marwijk, Haverkate, Van Royen and The. Starting from qualitative interviews, the act of euthanasia seems to be for the physician problematic and even traumatic, also in countries where euthanasia is a legal option. This emotional contrast-experience is an important locus for the ethical reflection. I will discuss one topic of the conclusion of the research: what is the place, meaning and limit of the moral integrity of the practitioner? In the act (...) of euthanasia, a relation of many years based on trust is often presupposed by the physician in order to legitimate morally his involvement in the act of euthanasia. At the same time, physicians experience an inconsistent relation between their acting and their personal emotional and moral experience. The legal possibility to refuse the involvement in the euthanasia, doesn’t take away the ethical unrest and physicians can experience to leave their patients to fend for themselves. Can the responsibility and the loyalty towards the patient implicate that one passes over his own moral integrity? A one-sided interpretation of the ethics of Levinas could suggest a positive answer to this question. A choice for the concrete goodness happens in the face-to-face relation with the other. The other’s interest and not the own existing values are decisive. This could lead to the suggestion of an absolute presence for the other. The own moral integrity is subordinated towards the ethical responsibility for the other. To this kind of reasoning, we put two questions: Every form of responsibility presupposes a moral integrity. The autonomy and the conscience of the physician is presupposed for taking up the responsibility towards the patient. It cannot be annihilated by the faithfulness and responsibility. The physician is not only responsible for the patient who is asking euthanasia, but also for his other patients. The act of euthanasia has consequences for his moral attitudes towards the third parties. The problem will be elaborated in a discussion with the concept of responsibility as developed by Emmanuel Levinas and Cathérine Chalier. The argument is based on a critical-philosophical reading of some biblical texts. The conclusion is relevant for the evaluation of the moral integrity of the physician as well as for the application of Levinas’ concept of responsibility in the field of biomedical ethics. (shrink)

Levinas' thinking in Totality and Infinity is centered on the relation with the Infinite. This relation is paradoxical. To be possible, the experience of a separated subject is postulated as a transcendental presupposition. But this separation is at the same time unthinkable without the Infinite. In his main work, The Star of Redemption, Franz Rosenzweig stimulates the thinking of this relation. The renewal of Levinas' thinking of the paradox is made possible by phaenomenology. But the confrontation with Husserl indicates the (...) limit of Levinas' thinking: the asymmetrical relation with the Infinite is unthinkable without the acceptance of some kind of symmetry. (shrink)

A critical reflection on the intersubjective relationship. Firstly, we describe the concept of the ‘I’ in Ricoeur’s thinking. As the first grammatical person, the ‘I’ shows a fundamental ambiguity. It is situated as original freedom or subjectivity, that objectifies itself in actions. This becomes apparent from the attestation of freedom and from the linguistic structure of acting. Secondly, we expound how this double status of freedom is the precondition for a responsible relation with the other, marked by symmetry and respect. (...) Ricoeur offers here a promising alternative to the difficulties of Levinas’s thinking. The discussion between Ricoeur and Levinas is mainly about the evaluation of Husserl, although Ricoeur seems to be mostly inspired by Kant’s view of human respect. Finally, we confront Ricoeur’s interpretation of intersubjectivity as respect with the problem of forgiveness as it is developed in the second text of Ricoeur we find translated in this book. (shrink)

Levinas' thinking in Totality and Infinity is centered on the relation with the Infinite. This relation is paradoxical. To be possible, the experience of a separated subject is postulated as a transcendental presupposition. But this separation is at the same time unthinkable without the Infinite. In his main work, The Star of Redemption, Franz Rosenzweig stimulates the thinking of this relation. The renewal of Levinas' thinking of the paradox is made possible by phaenomenology . But the confrontation with Husserl indicates (...) the limit of Levinas' thinking: the asymmetrical relation with the Infinite is unthinkable without the acceptance of some kind of symmetry. (shrink)

Luc Anckaert deals with the question of the relationship between economic globalisation and ethics. Between the two walls of the double tower there is a strained relation. Is man as a person the measure of ‘economic matters’ or is man inserted into an economic network, the centre of which is left unoccupied? This double question could end in an anti-globalist critique in behalf of the personalistic dignity of man, including a plea for another economy on the one hand, or, on (...) the other hand, in a legitimisation of the economic globalisation by correcting, mitigating or reorienting it with an eye to our concern with man. Either anti-globalisation or otherwise-globalisation, or an economic globalisation with a humane face. The critical question with regard to this binary approach is whether it does not smother the voice of ethics. Ethics has no well-fixed or determinable place within the logic of globalisation, and it can not be identified with the upright protest which arises from an experience of contrast either. The tragedy of ethics consists in its being situated in between the factuality of reality and the refusal of getting absorbed in it. (shrink)

The article is a close reading of a Talmudic commentary by Levinas. Its purpose is to deconstruct the concept of creation in order to demonstrate the radical passivity preceding human freedom. In ‘And God Created Woman’ Levinas points to the orthographic issue of the duplication of the yod in ‘vayyitzer’. This issue is radicalized to distinguish two moments in creation. In the first creation out of nothing, humanity is at stake. Creation is the condition in which man appears as totally (...) visible in the eyes of God. This passivity, without refuge, makes ethics possible. This is called the mystery of the human psyche. In the second act of creation, the relation between man and woman is established as the concrete shape of the first creation. Here Levinas deepens responsibility to unconditional responsibility. Being created means being made responsible. The two concepts of creation are sharpened starting from the thinking of Derrida and Nancy. The relation with the alterity of the son is the incarnation of the created responsibility. This aspect is elaborated in dialogue with Kierkegaard’s and Cathérine Chalier’s commentary of the Abraham story. The son teaches by asking the question about the reality of the covenant that registers itself in being created. From the reality of the covenant, the question of creation appears in its ultimate passivity. (shrink)

A suggestion for research on Rosenzweig and Viktor von Weizsacker, Franz Rosenzweig's Philosophical legacy: Levinas or Strauss?

Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Ph.D. Degree in Religious Studies and the Degree of Doctor in Theology — Faculty of Theology.