”Separation in Proximity

The context of the Levinasian éthique is not intersubjectivity. This context is communication. The possibility of intersubjetive communication and, on a more general level, of signification, meaning and manifestation, is separation in the economy of proximity. These possibilities have in common the requirement that the real be defined as an element which produces discontinuity. As mentioned earlier Levinas’ career in philospohy is motivated by the exigency to think separation or multiplicity as factors which are not reduced or dissolved by their rooting in the homogeneity of the Same. Relation cannot constitute communication, for Levinas, if its only economy is totalization and correlation. Relation is possible only as a function of a separation proceeding from the impossibility of totalization.”


”Bataille, Blanchot and Levinas are among the most private and independent of twentieth-century thinkers. Their respective indifference to the prevailing intellectual currents of their time, and the resulting marginality and lack of influence which characterize their texts, are most palpable. Yet, within this very privacy and marginality, each of these thinkers remain involved with the other two.”

Ur Joseph Libertson; Proximity, Levinas, Blanchot, Bataille and Communication (1982).


Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:


Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Google-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Ansluter till %s