Emmanuel Levinas Phenomenology Ethical Constructivism

Emmanuel Levinas Phenomenology

Ethical Constructivism

Emmanuel Levinas was a French philosopher and an intellectual scholar whose propositions and influence expounded on the study of phenomenology. While drawing ideas on his philosophies, Emmanuel met a German philosopher, Martin Heidegger who was fully affiliated to the Nazis. This affiliation-based Emmanuel's phenomenological philosophy under enthusiastic criticism of Heidegger. His influential study of western philosophy led to the comprehension of existential phenomenology in France and led to the development of ethical and morality, based on the eventual activities of the World War II. In addition, the philosophy developed included an inter-subjective relation to ethics through deontology, utilitarianism, self-legislation and virtue ethics. This greatly assisted in developing a conceptual sense and affectivity to Emmanuel's propositions. In this context, Emmanuel Levinas exemplifies ethical rationality and human freedom by inputting time and transcendence of totality and infinity into phenomenological description.

In representing time and ethics of the Other, Levinas phenomenology explores the conditions that offer possibilities of good actions to the interest of human lives

. This phenomenological perception deals with the critique of Heidegger's alternative philosophies on Totality and Infinity in light of three thematic concerns; existence, human Other and transcendence. These themes dilate the entire concept of Levinas phenomenology by providing descriptions and characterizations of constructivism. Comprehension of constructivism under the ethical description of Levinas, presumes the misconceptions, impositions and misconstructions that may be availed in advanced experience, either through cultural, religious, human senses or from different fields of science.

According to Levinas, phenomenology articulates fragility of ethical imperatives. As explanations of the ethical Other, by cutting through moral ambiguity, absolute and indestructible responsibility. This notion has described how human freedom (deontology) results to uncertainty of an ethical life. In addition, Levinas approach and thoughts on contemporary issues marginalizes the ideas of other philosophies by proposing the arguments on alterity as a matter of singularity. Levinas accounts in relation to Heidegger's philosophies and phenomenological traditions are depicted through metaphysics, constructivism, transcendence, totality and infinity, truth, discourse, deontology, phenomenology of Eros, descriptive psychology, absolute notion, Husserl philosophy and the Intuition theory.

Metaphysics and the Intuition Theory

According to Levinas, metaphysics is the face-to-face relationship, especially in relation to Totality and Infinity. The proximity in this relationship is a privileged and primordial phenomenon of gentleness as the close distance is felt. In relation to phenomenology, Levinas links this to the eventual repetition of everyday actions, but irreducible to objectified existence conceived intentionally. The face-to-face relationship interrupts premeditated consciousness, either in situational aloneness or solipsistic quality

. Aspects from totality and infinity led to Levinas quote "(t) he true life is absent. But we are in the world. Metaphysics arises and is maintained in this alibi…" Metaphysics is, therefore, distinguished using the facts that it moves towards something totally and entirely, that is towards the absolute other which is not merely other, but absolutely other. Its otherness, nevertheless, cannot be contrasted to the subjectivity. This means that metaphysical is fundamentally superior if Levinas perception is to be adopted; hence representing metaphysics as a transcendent proper.

Levinas phenomenology advocated for the existence of the Other in the context of Heidegger's alternative to totality and Infinity. The latter reduced the capacities of having a human being to theoretical relationships, among which metaphysical desire is a part. It is a dialect relation to the different ways in which quotidian desires determine lack. Similarly, this metaphysical desire is conclusive in the restoration or satisfaction in the subject of a given absorption of the object

The theory of intuition is a keen follow-up into Husserl's phenomenology philosophy. According to Husserl, his criticism of naturalism is a negative aspect he terms as limitation. Husserl also believed in the absolute presence of consciousness, and goes beyond that to show the existence of consciousness as an accurate science and that all aspects have to be grounded on the basis of consciousness which is the absolute source that reserves all meaning. He also believed in the phenomenological presence of being, which is both inescapable and, therefore, inevitable. Levinas, on the contrary, emerged with concepts of perception and judgment, which he thought were to be given exceptional priority when tackling phenomenology. Levinas was also in support of the concept of intellectualism, which he researched on and came up with conclusions stating that intellectualism, "prepare(s) the way for the intuitionist theory of truth," because "for the first time, judgment and perception are brought together and put on the same level" (Levinas, 1995, p.21).

Levinas propositions are inquisitive to ethical metaphysics, thoughts drawn from his distinctive and contribution to philosophy. Though intuition was Husserl early work, relations can be drawn from ethics and phenomenology. Heidegger's expository on alterity of Totality and infinity depicted a bias favor in theoretical consciousness, materialism and objectification of his ontological criticism. Levinas diverged from Heidegger's ontology descriptions due to lack of ethical significance, a precise representation of phenomenological inter-subjectivity.

Ethics

Heidegger's contribution to the Nazism depicted very little about his contribution to ethical enquiry.

His perception is an articulation prior a division amid a being and his or her identity. In addition, his is a struggle about the possibility of postmodern ethics. However, according to Levinas, ethics was, in fact, expected to precede metaphysics. Ethics is a first philosophy, and metaphysics can be termed as a subordinate under ethics and the concept of justice. Despite the traditional understanding of ethics, which was regarded in the western philosophies as a concept or discipline under philosophy, other ways were searched to assist the western philosophers appreciate the fact that ethics was all about other persons described as otherness during metaphysics. Ethics is what was prevents most of the global attempts to provide final explanations. In addition, Levinas reverted and defended his philosophy, against the traditional understanding of ethics. Contemporary perception asserts that ethics is related to egoism that could be defined as a relation to oneself as a primary relation such as in the works of Locke and Hobbes.

Another perception is that human beings have a responsibility to the Other, which is the most fundamental structure upon which all the other social structures will be founded

. Therefore, a phenomenological description of Ethics is currently understood as an egocentric behaving mode, nor a buildup of theories, but involvement in the limitation of a person's freedom with intentions of being open to other people in a manner that will allow them to be constrained by the others. Evidently, ethical codes are amid human actions and determine their level of rational motivation. This means it is an aspect that is inescapable by any human being. In addition, Levinas insisted that ethical is the spiritual itself, hence cannot be overcome by anything. It comes first. This concept of ethicality brought about the sense leading to the title of Levinas book entitled 'Humanism of the Other Man'.

In metaethics, constructivism is just a contributor to normative ethics. Levinas philosophies are a constructivist project due to its phenomenological propositions and hermeneutics of human experience. These experiences determine the human encounter with the universe, the human Other and a re-enactment of an encrusted interior characterized by responsiveness and affectivity.

In accordance with to constructivism opinions in ethics, the very truth of any single normative claim is part of the claim being entailed within the practical point-of-view. When constructivism is characterized in ethics, then the result is differentiation between the metaethical versions of constructivism and the restricted versions of the same. The restricted views in ethics usually specify selected restricted sets of claims, which are normative. The restricted versions insist that the truth of a given claim falling within the set will be constituted in the claim being entailed from within a practical viewing point/perception. Ideally, the most fundamental goal or objective of constructivism views is to assign an account stating the truth, in relation to a set of normative claims. According to Rawl, restricted constructivism viewpoint asserts that truth of claims that concerns sociopolitical justice in a liberal and democratic society consists of being part of the view's original position. Entrenched in an original position set-up, certain prescriptive judgments implicit political culture to the public in a liberal democratic society.

(Street, 2009, p 8).

Scanlon's restricted constructivist view is that the truths of claims concerned with the acting of right or wrong that is what oneself owes to the other, consists of their being entailed from a certain point-of-view of a contractual situation. The contractual situation is that the normative judgment is inevitable, where everyone has a reason to live with others under specific and certain terms that cannot be rejected due to unenforced agreements, which are general, unless adequate grounds are established to reject the agreement. Mostly, restrictive constructivism hardly gives the truth of other substantive normative views.

In contrary, the metaethical constructivism views do seek to provide a distinguished account of the truth in normative claims. In the process of doing this, the latter views try to appeal the ideas related to what will follow within the practical point if given formal characterization. The metaphysical constructivists who are successful hardly take the truth of a substantive normative claim for granted.

Transcendence

In his phenomenological descriptions, Levinas used various accounts of transcendence to refer to the tradition and divergence of phenomenology in relation to Heidegger. His transcendences enacted the irreducible urge by oneself to get past the limitations of their social and physical states or conditions. Transcendence of the Other as described by Levinas is the state beyond materialism and within finite being. Through this, Levinas established the limits of phenomenology from within its boundaries. Totality and Infinity, therefore, transcends to "ethical optics," which seek to fulfill and surpass phenomenology metaphysically, reaching out to the Other. In his explanations, Levinas develops his philosophical beginnings of phenomenology through the inflections of transcendence as the need for escapism, variations on Being, responsibility and beyond and Other-in-the-same. Rational ideologies from these aspects depict human experience conjoined to intentionality.

Need for Escapism

According to his notions related to transcendence, Levinas was keen to address matters that are linked to mortality, infinity and finite beings. Despite having different opinions, Levinas confirmed the truth in Heidegger's arguments, which suggested that humans experience themselves as though they were cast to the world

. Levinas was also of thought that beings do not have control over their beginnings and endings in the world. Heidegger's perception of human beings is that they will live most of their lives projecting and having different expectations in line with possibilities, and may, therefore, confront boldly their own mortality in the same way.

Heidegger's transcendence according to Levinas contradicted to theology. However, during his works as a philosopher, Levinas based his argument, not on the fact that Heidegger opposed theology, but Heidegger's case that humans had the ability of being out of one self. To be more philosophical, a question was to be answered as to the extent of the ideas of limit in relation to finiteness and infiniteness. The question asked by Levinas was whether there was a need for an infinite being to take a leave of themselves. If the question was to be answered, then the humans could be seen as admittedly finite. In analyzing being's infiniteness, humans were to ask themselves whether infiniteness was ideal for the promise of contentment in eternity and self-sufficiency7. In Levinas understanding of transcendence, he was brave enough in his works to link and relate it to the directions of something other than ourselves hence the deepest motivation brought about by need happens when humans need to disappear from the being that they are including their embodiment and natural situation.

Variations on Being

Transcendental phenomenology from Levinas was determinant of Heidegger's enquiry with recourse that reflects the ideology of need and pleasure, which give the human being a sense of deontology. Heideggerian themes on variations of being asserted that the Being is readiness and togetherness. Rationalism depends on human union, and neither can an individual bring out his or her self-freedom nor can he or she find "insideness." However, Levinas argument contends the assimilation of existentiale, an insight of how phenomenon determines a human's capability to be free from world constraints, independence and avoidance of physical existence weaknesses.

Issues of transcendence have continued to be argued in the middle and present period decades, where the meaning of transcendence was redefined to a temporal transcendence that is promised by fecundity, which means the birth of the son. The prior partial transcendence that emphasized on voluptuosity and pleasures was developed better with specific variations. In exemplifying this, the future of a family will responds to two fundamental limits that have to be imposed on representation and human knowledge that is the other person and death. Unlike Heidegger's intuition concerning death (when seen in the stance of those alive) as a possibility of impossibility, Levinas argued this case by identifying that death was just a death of the other hence qualifying it as radical alterity and accepting that death the impossibility of all the other possibilities2. Predicting and control the other person is, therefore, impossible for the human being. The current and a new framework constituting the concept of transcendence which is a human responsibility involve the extensive face-to-face relationship hence giving links to the existence of sociality and justice. After analyzing the above philosophical principles concerned with transcendence, ethics can be easily attributed to an affair where particulars are inserted directly into abstract scenarios. Ethics also speaks with particularity concerning "first human particularity" which is the face-to-face relationship.

Responsibility, and Beyond

Another aspect of transcendence according to Levinas is the perspective of responsibility and beyond. This notion is linked to the significance of Heidegger's alternative to Totality and Infinity and how it is exemplified in the face-to-face relationship. Human being ought to find ethical ground upon experiences in order to escape from deontology and utility. The unity of mind and the Being evolves dialectically and; therefore, the decisions to make rational activities and decisions is dictated by the lack of integration in logics of control or manipulation1. Contrary to Heidegger's propositions, pure and practical reason can never be marginalized. Heidegger, however, stated that the universality of these two concepts and their relation to transcendence is deficient of rationality and instrumentalism.

The particularity of rationalism and ethics is represented transcendentally with phenomenological insights of what Levinas involved in his phenomenological philosophies. The relations of non-finite draw continued responsibility as transcendental frameworks that involve extensive researches on social existence and justice. Transcendence as responsibility and beyond to the Being has been viewed under various themes that use the polemical approach.

i) the logics of Totality and Infinity

Totality and Infinity addresses such topics as metaphysics and transcendence, separation and discourse, truth and justice, separation and the absolute, interiority and economics, enjoyment and representation and many other fields. Some of this has already been addressed. To begin with, there has to be a description of separation and discourse, with the works of Emmanuel on atheism or the Will being focused. The ideas conceptualized by infinity will in most cases imply to separation of the other with regard to the same. However, according to Levinas, the mentioned separation cannot rest on opposition against the other as this would be termed as anti-thetical. According to Emmanuel, a transcendence that is absolute in nature has to be a product that is non-integrable.

ii) Truth

Levinas phenomenology discusses truth as a two-way summary, truth of disclosure and truth of testimony. These two aspects of truth give insights to subjectivity and infinity. In addition, his representations of truth are also dictated from the terms in which Heidegger discusses truth in his alternative to Totality and Infinity. From the philosophical understanding, truth is a self-manifestation of a human being to being conscious. The latter dictates human subjectivity and determination of concrete schematization of rational decisions

. An assertion that testimonials depict a certain level of truth is co-relate to the confessions one makes from their experience, however, from Levinas experience, however, from Levinas description, unless testimonies are supported by a primordial relation amid consciousness and Being, then they cannot represent any level of truth

iii) Discourse

In the confirmation of truth as being modality in terms of relating the other and the same, there is a respect that being is the illuminator of the intellect. The originality of separation is linked to the autonomy of a separated being. In knowledge, for instance, a knower will definitely be separated from the known being. If the object is in any way involved with both labor and project of the knower, the reason might be that the objective cognition has relations with the other being, who is beyond the same and is open to interruptions. This later explains why history is always, and will forever be absent from the current and present situations. History disappears behind its manifestations, and both its principle and origin are not part of us, but elsewhere

Totality and infinity do not pay much attention to history or movement of time on clocks. This is because humans do not situate their time firstly as in social time with inventions such as calendars and clocks. History is shared by everyone including the metaphysicians. Levinas, in his writings, defines the past in line with war, violence and great extremes of conflicts. Nevertheless, history does not identify wrongs that have been done and were arrested; such happenings do not make history in human lives. Levinas decided to assume the obvious meaning of time as duration, and focused on time in the form of two different axes. One is the synthesis of current moments; Husserl's structure of the transcendental consciousness and the second was some form of interruption that Levinas referred to as events of transcendence.

Desire and mastery is what is controlling humans through provisions of motivation. However, desire in terms of Totality and Infinity is in two distinct sections. The section that focuses on naturalistic desire, which is subject to issues rating with enjoyment and consumption. The mentioned desire coexists with the concrete freedom. The other desire is that which is conceptualized when human will to mastery fails. In most cases, the will to mastery failures are experienced in the face-to-face relationships. According to Levinas, the other's face cannot be objective but expression, which will affect one before the being starts to reflect on it

; (Carla & Zalta, 2011, p.3).

In determining the relationship between truth and justice, Levinas appreciated the fact that truth cannot be separated from the concept of intelligibility, where knowing does not only mean that one has recorded, but also includes comprehending on the recorded facts. Knowing can also be defined as justifying or rather making intervene using the moral order which is a notion of justice. In justifying a fact, one is expected to lift from one or more of its characters of being factual, that is past and, therefore, irrevocable meaning it interferes with human spontaneity. Knowing can only be itself when it is critical at the same time, and expresses itself into question and finally rewinds beyond its original state.

iv) Human freedom

In the determination to understand human freedom, there is the necessity to internalize the concept of humanism, which is the education of a human being so as to reach a sense of wholeness and well-being. In trying to find the truth and give meaning to humanism, it may lead to crooked paths. However, this could be aligned if we used practices of spirituality and goodwill. Levinas works on metaphysics and spirituality, if well integrated, could bring great meaning and light in developing humanism concepts based on philosophies and distinguished practices

. Humanism has been categorized as fundamental in the educational turns in subjects of concern including; human freedom, self-discovery, ethics and subjectivity. Humanism provides to philosophers ideas that affect personhood and relations of persons in terms of learning.

Humanism was based on the work done by Levinas, which went beyond ontological phenomenology done initially be Martin Heidegger. Levinas unique presentation of work that was rich in ideas and complexity of terminologies and ideologies. He managed to derive a sense of otherwise that led to transcendence in humans in terms of mercy, ethics, prayers and justice. Levinas' thoughts involved the belief in difficult freedom, which being witnesses the command from God in the face of the other. Using Levinas's thought could easily signify impossibility. On the other hand, Levinas' thoughts have done a great deal in articulating sense of justice, moral conscience and a locus of unknowability12.

In one of the essays "Freedom and Command" Levinas had the view that human freedom has no option, but to follow and order that it finds itself so as to determine itself as freedom. When the order that is alien is interiorized in such a way that it is coming from the self, then the self completely loses freedom. Therefore, in case the will of the commander is in advance form, as per the will of the one that is commanded, who experiences a command as a thing that is newly discovered but was initial to its discovery as a thing inside him.

If the above notions are to be used, then one would comfortably conclude that there is exteriority different from the alterity of a different person which is a part of the freedom itself. However, there is reason to believe that Levinas argument could be on the basis that externality is an object linked to an intentional system that focuses on interiorizing that which is outside to be a part of one. The existence of freedom, according to Levinas, is in the sensuous body of human. In his opinion, body is any organ that is capable of seizing the world. We, humans insert ourselves to the world and build a position on earth13.

According to Emmanuel Levinas10, existence is not condemned to freedom. However, existence is invested and constituted as freedom meaning freedom cannot be bare. In philosophizing, those involved need to trace freedom back to its roots and disclose any inventions that liberate / free freedom from the arbitrary. There is also great need to understand that it is truth that presupposes justice and not vice versa. The spontaneous freedom related to the I that is not concerned with its justification lead to an eventual situation that is inscribed using the principle of a separated being. Truth, without any reasonable doubt, correlates with freedom as it is freedom of a human being which is alone in interiority.