What do you think?
Rate this book
Levinas and Kierkegaard in Dialogue
Few philosophers have devoted more than passing attention to similarities between the thought of Søren Kierkegaard, a Danish Christian, and Emmanuel Levinas, a French Jew. Here, one of philosophy of religion's most distinctive voices offers a sustained comparison. Focusing on questions surrounding otherness, transcendence, postmodernity, and the nature of religious thought, Merold Westphal draws readers into a dialogue between the two thinkers. Westphal's masterful command of both philosophies shows that each can learn from the other. Levinas and Kierkegaard in Dialogue is an insightful and accessible contribution to philosophical considerations of ethics and religion.
208 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
2 people are currently reading
40 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 21, 2024
Westphal’s book (Levinas and Kierkegaard in Dialogue) takes readers through the works of both Kierkegaard and Levinas (phenomenology aside), in the quest to reveal the unique relationship to God, the holy, divine, or the “transcendent” that each philosophizes. While establishing both thinkers’ unique relationship to God in and through human “subjecthood,” there are several conclusions that Westphal arrives at that can be expressed succinctly as follows (these points do not represent the depth or nuance of the author's position) :
First, for Levinas, it is the “Face” of the Other (expressive of radical alterity) that mediates our experience of and relationship to the divine, God, or the “trace” of the Holy that shows up in the other’s face. Here, an ethics, as it were, is antecedent to the Holy. Second, for Kierkegaard, it is our initial relationship to God (the religious) that opens the potential for our ethical interactions with others. Here, God is antecedent to both interpersonal relationships and “self-hood” itself, and third, for both, they work in a way that pushes against both ancient and modern senses of self-hood, that is a sense of self that is identifiable, immutable, permanent – in short, imagine the human subject in Descartes (cogito/ego). In both philosophers there is a desire to shatter traditional subject-hood and not merely de-center or de-nucleate the human subjectivity. Related to this issue is the concern for assessing and challenging the "absolute" epistemic view that is typically associated with "humanism" - which has, as the critique runs, wrongly and hubristically "deified" the supreme power of human knowledge while doing away with the God of the three major monotheistic religions.
It is a deeply researched text that is not for beginners coming to these thinkers for the first time, e.g., the author jumps between specific historical periods where it is obvious that the philosophers’ work and views have undergone change, have been further developed. The author tends to be somewhat repetitive, there are quotations that he incorporates that are repeated (in full form) as many as four times throughout the different chapters of the book. This is one reason, I think, that the author claims the book can be read as six individual essays or journal articles.
There is also a tendency, and this relates to the many scholars Westphal incorporates to further buttress his claims, to introduce lines of thought that remain incomplete. I’ll provide but one example: When discussing ethics in light of Levinas’ philosophy, Westphal introducers Carol Gilligan and the philosophy of “care ethics,” but its unclear if he’s attempting to draw a connection, which I argue simply can’t be established, between the views. The only similarity that stands out is that care ethics (e.g., Nussbaum), which is unconcerned with "ontology," dismisses the universality of hard and fast moral principles of ethics – originally, care ethics responded to the problem of Kant’s deontology and the notion of unquestionable duty at the exclusion of “circumstances” when rendering a moral judgment (L. Kohlberg’s theory of moral development).
It's a thin volume (the text ends on page 151), but it is dense, and it is divided into four sections on (1) revelation, (2) God, (3) heteronomy, and (4) reversal. There are two chapters in each division that vacillate between analyses of Kierkegaard on the one hand and Levinas on the other. And the material is all presented in a fair and balanced manner. The content is set within a contemporary theological context, and it is aptly shown how these thinkers might contribute to deepening the reader’s understanding and religious faith.
The book is for scholars or pastors that possess far more than a “working knowledge” of these thinkers. For readers looking for an introductory text, this is not the book for you. Overall, it is a rewarding study and well-worth reading. This will undeniably appeal to readers of Continental philosophy.
Dr. James M. Magrini
Former: Philosophy & Religious Studies/College of Dupage
First, for Levinas, it is the “Face” of the Other (expressive of radical alterity) that mediates our experience of and relationship to the divine, God, or the “trace” of the Holy that shows up in the other’s face. Here, an ethics, as it were, is antecedent to the Holy. Second, for Kierkegaard, it is our initial relationship to God (the religious) that opens the potential for our ethical interactions with others. Here, God is antecedent to both interpersonal relationships and “self-hood” itself, and third, for both, they work in a way that pushes against both ancient and modern senses of self-hood, that is a sense of self that is identifiable, immutable, permanent – in short, imagine the human subject in Descartes (cogito/ego). In both philosophers there is a desire to shatter traditional subject-hood and not merely de-center or de-nucleate the human subjectivity. Related to this issue is the concern for assessing and challenging the "absolute" epistemic view that is typically associated with "humanism" - which has, as the critique runs, wrongly and hubristically "deified" the supreme power of human knowledge while doing away with the God of the three major monotheistic religions.
It is a deeply researched text that is not for beginners coming to these thinkers for the first time, e.g., the author jumps between specific historical periods where it is obvious that the philosophers’ work and views have undergone change, have been further developed. The author tends to be somewhat repetitive, there are quotations that he incorporates that are repeated (in full form) as many as four times throughout the different chapters of the book. This is one reason, I think, that the author claims the book can be read as six individual essays or journal articles.
There is also a tendency, and this relates to the many scholars Westphal incorporates to further buttress his claims, to introduce lines of thought that remain incomplete. I’ll provide but one example: When discussing ethics in light of Levinas’ philosophy, Westphal introducers Carol Gilligan and the philosophy of “care ethics,” but its unclear if he’s attempting to draw a connection, which I argue simply can’t be established, between the views. The only similarity that stands out is that care ethics (e.g., Nussbaum), which is unconcerned with "ontology," dismisses the universality of hard and fast moral principles of ethics – originally, care ethics responded to the problem of Kant’s deontology and the notion of unquestionable duty at the exclusion of “circumstances” when rendering a moral judgment (L. Kohlberg’s theory of moral development).
It's a thin volume (the text ends on page 151), but it is dense, and it is divided into four sections on (1) revelation, (2) God, (3) heteronomy, and (4) reversal. There are two chapters in each division that vacillate between analyses of Kierkegaard on the one hand and Levinas on the other. And the material is all presented in a fair and balanced manner. The content is set within a contemporary theological context, and it is aptly shown how these thinkers might contribute to deepening the reader’s understanding and religious faith.
The book is for scholars or pastors that possess far more than a “working knowledge” of these thinkers. For readers looking for an introductory text, this is not the book for you. Overall, it is a rewarding study and well-worth reading. This will undeniably appeal to readers of Continental philosophy.
Dr. James M. Magrini
Former: Philosophy & Religious Studies/College of Dupage
Displaying 1 of 1 review