Levinas, Heidegger & Objects

Posted on January 14, 2010
Filed Under Heidegger, Philosophy | Leave a Comment

Enowning linked to a post by dis|closure on “enjoying your objects.” It’s interesting as it raises one place where I think Levinas simply gets Heidegger wrong.

Levinas refutes the Heideggerian notion that the existents in our lives, whether they be bread, hammers, pens, etc. are simply tools, or “means of life.” Levinas claims that, though we might need such tools, they are actually enjoyed. This is the beginning of the concept he calls “living from…” Levinas claims, in opposition to the Heideggerian school of thought, that “existence is not exhausted by utilitarian schematism that delineates (existents) as having the existence of hammers, needles, or machines. They are always in a certain measure– and even the hammers, needles, and machines are objects of enjoyment…”

But this is simply wrong. Heidegger doesn’t think in the least that utility exhausts existence. Rather looking at how objects are encountered in one kind of relationship allows an existential analysis. There are other sorts of analysis – some hinted at – beyond what the focus is in Being and Time. And indeed the latter Heidegger often delves into those. (IMO) Now it is true that Heidegger argues that one way (perhaps the most important way) we encounter entities is through a break down of utility. The ready-at-hand allowing the present-at-hand to be presented to us. However to suggest the only way to be with other occurrent entities is via utility is just plain wrong.

The other problem with how Levinas reads Heidegger is that he so often reads Heidegger like nearly a Kantian idealist. That is he assumes Heidegger gives no respect nor offers no “ethical” moods regarding the things themselves. However even responsibility is a kind of consideration arising out of our dealing with entities. Likewise Levinas’ position ends up discounting Heidegger’s realism. (Recognizing that the question of “what kind of realism” is still a matter of debate)

So my view of Levinas, as a non-Levinas scholar but someone influenced by reading Levinas, is that Levinas ends up retracing a lot of the analysis of Heidegger but in different terms and with a different focus. That’s not bad as I think Levinas’ focus is important and it is perhaps understandable why so many miss it in Heidegger.

(Note: I’d discussed Levinas and Heidegger before – for some reason the Wordpress similar post plug in isn’t picking it up)

Related posts:

  1. Heidegger vs. Levinas
  2. Heidegger and Science
  3. Heidegger and Realism
  4. Why Heidegger?
  5. Philosophical Focus
  6. Mormonism, Externalism and OOO

Comments

Leave a Reply