The ethics of facing the Other in suicide

2021 ◽  
pp. 136345932110616
Author(s):  
Katrina Jaworski
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Judith Butler ◽  
The Other ◽  
Youth Suicide ◽  
Queer Youth ◽  
Interview Technique ◽  
Human Ethics

Despite a plethora of existing literature on the topic of suicide, very little attention has been given to research ethics in practice in research on suicide. When suicide research does pay attention to the ethical issues researchers are likely to face, the focus is on the roles institutional human ethics review committees fulfil to ensure ethical conduct in all stages of research. In response to this problem, this article focuses on the philosophical relationship between qualitative methodology and research ethics in the context of researching queer youth suicide. In so doing, I draw on my experiences of interviewing gender-and sexually diverse young people about their familiarity with suicide. These experiences are based on a qualitative pilot study I conducted on queer youth suicide, which used the unstructured interview technique to collect data. Drawing on the works of Emmanuel Levinas and Judith Butler, I examine what it means to face the alterity of the suicidal ‘Other’, and what this facing entails in terms of research ethics as relational. I argue that facing reveals not only myself as more vulnerable than I anticipated, but also the suicidal ‘Other’ as agentic instead of only vulnerable and at-risk of suicide.

The Vulnerability of Precious Things

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoon Sook Cha
Keyword(s):  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Judith Butler ◽  
The Other

This chapter, a reading of “La Personne et le sacré,” asks how an ethics modelled on self-dispossession might recognize and respond to the cry of the other, specifically to his demand not to be harmed. The difficulty of such recognition is reflected in the expression of the demand, which Weil characterizes as being below semantic intelligibility and appeal. The demand nevertheless contains an ethical address in the binding character of its summons and the obligation to preserve the other from harm that ensues even when that demand entails one’s own subject dislocation and impels one toward impersonal being. Drawing upon the model of ecstatic relationality offered by Judith Butler and Emmanuel Levinas, this chapter considers how the other’s claim upon oneself propels us towards an ethical relationality based on subject displacement and vulnerability, asking how self-dispossession might be a passage to the other.

scholarly journals Social Researchers’ Approaches to Research Ethics During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Exploratory Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 155626462110550
Author(s):  
Adrianna Surmiak ◽  
Beata Bielska ◽  
Katarzyna Kalinowska
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
The Other ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Qualitative Survey ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Research And Education ◽  
New Situation

The global COVID-19 pandemic and quarantine/distancing measures have forced researchers to cope with a new situation. This paper aimed to analyze how the pandemic and its associated constraints have affected social researchers’ approach to research ethics. Drawing on an online qualitative survey with 193 Polish social researchers conducted in April and May 2020, we distinguished three approaches: nothing has changed, opportunity-oriented, and precautionary. According to the first, the pandemic was not regarded as a situation that required additional reflection on ethical issues or changes in research approaches. By contrast, the other two were based on the assumption that the pandemic affected research project ethics. The difference was in the assessment of changes in the area of ethics. The pandemic presented an opportunity and a threat to the ethicality of research, respectively. We discuss the implications of all three approaches for research and education.

Gratitude as a Performative

2021 ◽  
pp. 000332862110238
Author(s):  
Armand E Larive
Keyword(s):  
General Theory ◽  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
Paul Ricoeur ◽  
Judith Butler ◽  
The Other ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Over Time

Rather than a general theory of gratitude, the paper focuses on gratitude as a human dynamic in appreciative recognition of others. The phenomenology of Emmanuel Levinas’ face-to-face ethics is discussed as the subject’s call to responsibility for an Other. Following Jacques Derrida’s criticism of how this responsibility binds the subject into a hostage position regarding the Other, Paul Ricoeur repairs the working value of Levinas’ ethics by loosening the face-to-face obligation of the Other into one of reconnaissance, or thankful recognition. Without losing the face-to-face dynamic, the expression of reconnaissance is then investigated through J. L. Austin’s theory of performatives where gratitude is expressed as a speech act, or with the help of Judith Butler, where performativity is an activity expressing a reconnaissance between people over time. Three examples are given at the end.

scholarly journals Traducir el rostro del otro: encuentros culturales entre Judith Butler y Emmanuel Levinas

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 286-295
Author(s):  
Pablo Pérez Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Judith Butler ◽  
Media Representations ◽  
The Other ◽  
Cultural Translation ◽  
Ethical Responsibility ◽  
Politics Of Representation ◽  
Social Landscape ◽  
The Face ◽  
Responsibility Ethics

Judith Butler draws on Emmanuel Levinas’ ethics in order to question processes of humanization and dehumanization taking place through various practices of representation of the face of the other. This is a singular reading leading Levinas’ work to the field of media representations conceived as an agonistic social landscape where the demand of the face is offered or, on the contrary, hidden from us. In that sense, Butler’s cultural transposition of Levinasian ethics entails a politicization of ethics which is indistinguishable, at the end, from an ethic assault to the politics of representation. In this cultural bond among ethics and politics arise fundamental questions on responsibility linking it to the practice of cultural translation while offering alternatives to some common universalist shortcuts of contemporary ethical reflection.Keywords: Cultural translation, ethical responsibility, ethics of alterity.

La ética del Otro: una introducción al pensamiento de Emmanuel Lévinas

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-14
Author(s):  
Carlos Alvaréz Teijeiro
Keyword(s):  
Interpersonal Relationships ◽  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Radical Change ◽  
The Other ◽  
Western Philosophy ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Essential Question ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
First Philosophy

Emmanuel Lévinas, the philosopher of ethics par excellence in the twentieth century, and by own merit one of the most important ethical philosophers in the history of western philosophy, is also the philosopher of the Other. Thereby, it can be said that no thought has deepened like his in the ups and downs of the ethical relationship between subject and otherness. The general objective of this work is to expose in a simple and understandable way some ideas that tend to be quite dark in the philosophical work of the author, since his profuse religious production will not be analyzed here. It is expected to show that his ideas about the being and the Other are relevant to better understand interpersonal relationships in times of 4.0 (re)evolution. As specific objectives, this work aims to expose in chronological order the main works of the thinker, with special emphasis on his ethical implications: Of the evasion (1935), The time and the Other (1947), From the existence to the existent (1947), Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority (1961) and, last, Otherwise than being, or beyond essence (1974). In the judgment of Lévinas, history of western philosophy starting with Greece, has shown an unusual concern for the Being, this is, it has basically been an ontology and, accordingly, it has relegated ethics to a second or third plane. On the other hand and in a clear going against the tide movement, our author supports that ethics should be considered the first philosophy and more, even previous to the proper philosophize. This novel approach implies, as it is supposed, that the essential question of the philosophy slows down its origin around the Being in order to inquire about the Other: it is a philosophy in first person. Such a radical change of perspective generates an underlying change in how we conceive interpersonal relationships, the complex framework of meanings around the relationship Me and You, which also philosopher Martin Buber had already spoken of. As Lévinas postulates that ethics is the first philosophy, this involves that the Other claims all our attention, intellectual and emotional, to the point of considering that the relationship with the Other is one of the measures of our identity. Thus, “natural” attitude –husserlian word not used by Lévinas- would be to be in permanent disposition regarding to the meeting with the Other, to be in permanent opening state to let ourselves be questioned by him. Ontology, as the author says, being worried about the Being, has been likewise concerned about the Existence, when the matter is to concern about the particular Existent that every otherness supposes for us. In conclusion it can be affirmed that levinasian ethics of the meeting with the Other, particular Face, irreducible to the assumption, can contribute with an innovative looking to (re)evolving the interpersonal relationships in a 4.0 context.

Emmanuel Levinas: Um estudo sobre a ética da alteridade

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abimael Francisco do Nascimento
Keyword(s):  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Transcendental Philosophy ◽  
The Other ◽  
New Thought ◽  
Philosophical Criticism ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Theoretical Foundations ◽  
First Philosophy

The general objective of this study is to analyze the postulate of the ethics of otherness as the first philosophy, presented by Emmanuel Levinas. It is a proposal that runs through Levinas' thinking from his theoretical foundations, to his philosophical criticism. Levinas' thought presents itself as a new thought, as a critique of ontology and transcendental philosophy. For him, the concern with knowledge and with being made the other to be forgotten, placing the other in totality. Levinas proposes the ethics of otherness as sensitivity to the other. The subject says here I am, making myself responsible for the other in an infinite way, in a transcendence without return to myself, becoming hostage to the other, as an irrefutable responsibility. The idea of the infinite, present in the face of the other, points to a responsibility whoever more assumes himself, the more one is responsible, until the substitution by other.

scholarly journals God Below: A Faith Born in Hell—Life and Fate and the Otherwise Than Being

Humanities ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 84
Author(s):  
Karl Shankar SenGupta
Keyword(s):  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
The Other ◽  
French Army ◽  
Holy Fool ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Utopian Thought ◽  
Primary Focus

This essay examines the idea of kenosis and holy folly in the years before, during, and after the Holocaust. The primary focus will be Vasily Grossman’s Life and Fate, though it also will touch upon Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Demons and the ethics of the Lithuanian-Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas, speaking to their intersecting ideas. Dostoevsky, true enough, predates the Shoah, whereas Grossman was a Soviet Jew who served as a journalist (most famously at the Battle of Stalingrad), and Levinas was a soldier in the French army, captured by the Nazis and placed in a POW camp. Each of these writers wrestles with the problem of evil in various ways, Dostoevsky and Levinas as theists—one Christian, the other Jewish—and Grossman as an atheist; yet, despite their differences, there are ever deeper resonances in that all are drawn to the idea of kenosis and the holy fool, and each writer employs variations of this idea in their respective answers to the problem of evil. Each argues, more or less, that evil arises in totalizing utopian thought which reifies individual humans to abstractions—to The Human, and goodness to The Good. Each looks to kenosis as the “antidote” to this utopian reification.

scholarly journals The Law Challenged and the Critique of Identity with Emmanuel Levinas

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Petrilli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Emmanuel Levinas ◽  
Object Relation ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Ethical Orientation ◽  
New Humanism ◽  
Present Essay ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Subject

AbstractIdentity as traditionally conceived in mainstream Western thought is focused on theory, representation, knowledge, subjectivity and is centrally important in the works of Emmanuel Levinas. His critique of Western culture and corresponding notion of identity at its foundations typically raises the question of the other. Alterity in Levinas indicates existence of something on its own account, in itself independently of the subject’s will or consciousness. The objectivity of alterity tells of the impossible evasion of signs from their destiny, which is the other. The implications involved in reading the signs of the other have contributed to reorienting semiotics in the direction of semioethics. In Levinas, the I-other relation is not reducible to abstract cognitive terms, to intellectual synthesis, to the subject-object relation, but rather tells of involvement among singularities whose distinctive feature is alterity, absolute alterity. Humanism of the other is a pivotal concept in Levinas overturning the sense of Western reason. It asserts human duties over human rights. Humanism of alterity privileges encounter with the other, responsibility for the other, over tendencies of the centripetal and egocentric orders that instead exclude the other. Responsibility allows for neither rest nor peace. The “properly human” is given in the capacity for absolute otherness, unlimited responsibility, dialogical intercorporeity among differences non-indifferent to each other, it tells of the condition of vulnerability before the other, exposition to the other. The State and its laws limit responsibility for the other. Levinas signals an essential contradiction between the primordial ethical orientation and the legal order. Justice involves comparing incomparables, comparison among singularities outside identity. Consequently, justice places limitations on responsibility, on unlimited responsibility which at the same time it presupposes as its very condition of possibility. The present essay is structured around the following themes: (1) Premiss; (2) Justice, uniqueness, and love; (3) Sign and language; (4) Dialogue and alterity; (5) Semiotic materiality; (6) Globalization and the trap of identity; (7) Human rights and rights of the other: for a new humanism; (8) Ethics; (9) The World; (10) Outside the subject; (11) Responsibility and Substitution; (12) The face; (13) Fear of the other; (14) Alterity and justice; (15) Justice and proximity; (16) Literary writing; (17) Unjust justice; (18) Caring for the other.

Research Ethics Committees’ Oversight of Biomedical Research in South Africa: A Thematic Analysis of Ethical Issues Raised During Ethics Review of Non-Expedited Protocols

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blessing Silaigwana ◽  
Douglas Wassenaar
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
South African ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Financial Contracts ◽  
Scientific Validity ◽  
Participant Selection ◽  
Education And Awareness

In South Africa, biomedical research cannot commence until it has been reviewed and approved by a local research ethics committee (REC). There remains a dearth of empirical data on the nature and frequency of ethical issues raised by such committees. This study sought to identify ethical concerns typically raised by two South African RECs. Meeting minutes for 180 protocols reviewed between 2009 and 2014 were coded and analyzed using a preexisting framework. Results showed that the most frequent queries involved informed consent, respect for participants, and scientific validity. Interestingly, administrative issues (non-ethical) such as missing researchers’ CVs and financial contracts emerged more frequently than ethical questions such as favorable risk/benefit ratio and fair participant selection. Although not generalizable to all RECs, our data provide insights into two South African RECs’ review concerns. More education and awareness of the actual ethical issues typically raised by such committees might help improve review outcomes and relationships between researchers and RECs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document